Newbie woes

[ezgoezit]

I think Salem could have it a lot worse than it does with the tribe. I’ve been playing perma-death games (MUDs) since the early 90s and then I was beta Ultima Online (UO) when I realized that whenever you had unrestricted PK you are always going to attract a very predictable and similar group of players that will come and derive their fun from killing other players and destroying or stealing. At least in Salem, this group plays under a pretense of RP and gives players a chance to “op-out”, even if it is at the expense of not being able to enjoy other aspects of the game.

UO solved this issue by creating a mirror of each server and making a PK side and a non-PK. Casual players, not into PK would often play the entire time on the non-PK side. From a business standpoint, it made a lot of sense. Unrestricted PK and perma-death (UO wasn’t perma-death of course) is an acquired taste and most non-hardcore players are just not into it. Losing the portion of the player base that is not into unrestricted PK and/or perma-death was financially detrimental, because the casual players spent a lot more money on the game than the hardcore players.

Salem’s creators have decided this game will be non-restricted PK and perma-death. That is cool with me, but that’s my thing. Even though I am not really into PK so much anymore, I get bored with games that don’t involve the risk of loss and consequences for actions. Most gamers out there are not like me though. Salem would have lost most of its initial player-base regardless of the tribe because most gamers don’t want to deal with the risk of losing everything. People tried the game, found it didn’t suit their taste, and left, simple as that. Also, if there was no tribe, there would still be that element of players that derive joy from taking from others.

You can complain all you want about the tribe. For the most part, they are the lowest common denominator of all online gamers. They are usually boys or young men that have maturity issues. They had a tough youth and haven’t managed to grow past it yet. Regardless of all of that, it doesn’t matter because you will not find a PK game that does not have players like them. Include them in your risk versus rewards assessment while deciding if you want to invest time in this game.

It is like complaining about the rain; you might not like it, but it is a fact of life.

Regards,

Ez

[Icon]

The old system let you get ahead if you were willing to put in the work, with fed up timers came a point of futility basically. You could risk a character easier back then because replacing it wasn't a 6 month process. The numbers went from what? 350-400 any time of any day, to maybe 150 by the time the tribe even got their first kill in. Butthurt by he devs might be a good term for it really.

anyways the point in trying to make is this, loosing a character should be a penalty, you should loose work, but not to the point where you don't want to play anymore. As for the tribe, you can post here all day long about it, like literally hundreds before you, but the reality is this, your options are to sign the treaty, start a resistance group, or accept whatever happens on your own. Same as the rest of the server...

Mathematically speaking, if someone were to round up all the "anti-tribe" people and form a group that actually learned to fight and whatnot, the numbers would be overwhelmingly in their favor, yet so far, who has done that?


And to be fair, with the slow character development, its 10 times to raise up combat alts now than it was before when timers didn't keep you from focusing on just 1 at a time

[Mereni]

For the most part, they are the lowest common denominator of all online gamers. They are usually boys or young men that have maturity issues. They had a tough youth and haven’t managed to grow past it yet.

No.

Get off your high horse.

[Chrumps]

Well, my solution is: go play minesweeper (yes, the one which comes with Windows) - it's usually less than 20sec gameplay instead of 3 hours a day and perfectly solves time issue. It has permadeath too .
Ok, I exaggerate, but generally speaking all MMO's are not for me because they inevitably require regular time investment.
I hope this finally excludes my personal decisions about playing from futher discussion.

I liked this game very much and I am ok with feeling of constant risk. I see there is a few issues solved better than in H&H (agriculture for example) and a few ideas from H&H finally implemented (braziers, reduced teleportation, canoes), there is better graphic too. So in my opinion this game is a step forward compared to H&H. I think it deserves bigger player base.

this:

UO solved this issue by creating a mirror of each server and making a PK side and a non-PK. Casual players, not into PK would often play the entire time on the non-PK side. From a business standpoint, it made a lot of sense. Unrestricted PK and perma-death (UO wasn’t perma-death of course) is an acquired taste and most non-hardcore players are just not into it. Losing the portion of the player base that is not into unrestricted PK and/or perma-death was financially detrimental, because the casual players spent a lot more money on the game than the hardcore players.

and this:

loosing a character should be a penalty, you should loose work, but not to the point where you don't want to play anymore

The old system let you get ahead if you were willing to put in the work, with fed up timers came a point of futility basically. You could risk a character easier back then because replacing it wasn't a 6 month process. The numbers went from what? 350-400 any time of any day, to maybe 150 by the time the tribe even got their first kill in.

I admit it is very hard to create a system where playing 12 hours a day would be rewarding compared to 1 hour a day yet would not give an unbeatable advantage. If this is not solved either hardcore or casual players will not be satisfied.

I do not think the right way is to create separate servers. The better solution is to create zones inside server so players can move to more dangerous zone as they progress in game. This is partially implemented by darkness (extra risk and more creatures) and Boston claim (no risk and almost nothing to do). Adding more grades in-between could be the way to go.

[er-queent8r]

Hey Chumps, champs whatever you name is, tell me where you base is? I would like to put an end to all your *****.

[Icon]

While we're derailing, I was trying to think of a way to compare the old system to the new system, and basically....

the original system was like gears of war, tough armor, no headshot penalty, and high rate of fire weapons.

After the Nerf, it became call of duty, some higher impact weapons, light armor, instant death from headshots

This system, wolfenstein......

All pretty much the same game except for "some mechanical differences". Wolfenstein was THE..**** back in the day, but it looses alot of replay ability after hacking lambiants in half with a lancer.