The PVP MegaThread

[Procne]

So are your listed conditions *all* required? Ie, will only top 10% characters be able to exact revenge on characters whose homestead has top notch defences?

top 10% characters would be like everyone's mains and leading 2 alts ^^

[Potjeh]

Well, in that case, I think that cannons and infiltration are OP if they can be used with throwaway alts. Killing people should require risking a decent character. At the same time, it should be accessible to most people who've put a month or two into their character, so that the top 10% players can't just massacre everyone else with impunity.

[JohnCarver]

top 10% characters would be like everyone's mains and leading 2 alts ^^

Hmmm not exactly the way I meant this.

I more or less meant players within 10% of the top players humors.

Of which their are 0.

#1 Humors on Server is more than 10% higher than #2. Which shows how lazy y'all are being on the whole glutton thing. But I am perfectly happy with said players being able to train wreck all of you thanks to his clearly higher measurable commitment. That being said, I doubt he would risk such a nice looking toy given that it would have a high probability to be summon killed if he took it out of whatever garage he has it in.

[ImpalerWrG]

#1 Humors on Server is more than 10% higher than #2.

Duuhh, You always get a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law distribution in that kind of thing, it is one of the most common distributions in nature, it means nothing other then that the system has uncapped growth potential in a competitive environment.

[JohnCarver]

Far from accurate analogy. If what you are referencing was applicable then we would see all Gold Medals in the Olympics 10%+ Greater than the times & records of the Silver Medal.

In most competitive events the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place are a hair away from each other.

Making the fact that there is no solid 2nd place contender in Salem all that more interesting.

[lachlaan]

I'd like to differentiate a bit between the different "attack" scenarios you could be refering to when saying that the attacker should always win if he does x.

In a situation of man to man combat, the attacker should win if he:

1) Grossly surpasses me in humour levels and puts that to good use.
2) Grossly surpasses me in skill.
3) A combination of the above because no single one should really be enough without the "grossly" part of it.

However I'm not sure if that's the sort of suggestions you were looking for, and to be fair little can be said in each situation, and no one rule can be valid on its own. Like, simply being in the top 10% humours shouldn't guarantee a win in terms of combat without the prerequisite achievements of
a) Managing to actually engage your target
b) Manage to stick to him so he doesn't escape
c) Don't suck too horribly at fighting.

Where c) to me would mean that no amount of humours should allow for easymode wins in a fight. At least some basic level of combat skill should be required. I guess that counts more towards keeping an enemy in combat than fighting them, since a newbie as skilled as he may be will eventually run out of yb / bb soon before a giant will run out of blood if he's geared properly.

As for the other scenarios, I want to believe you mean something more along the lines of ... the person actively engaging the other will always win provided they play their cards right. As in, passive defense shouldn't beat active sieging. But active sieging/raiding shouldn't necessarily trump active defending, where the defender goes on the offense to kill the raiders or chase them off. Anything more literal than this interpretation sounds a bit silly in that it's bound to fuel the destruction of everything ever since attacking is encouraged, and perhaps highly favoured.

That in turn might make the required efford to keep rebuilding any manner of base with decent infrastructure nigh unsustainable, at least for me. Would like to hear more abstract ideas from you as well as to what you guys have in mind currently, so we can actually make this a back and forth.

[ImpalerWrG]

Far from accurate analogy. If what you are referencing was applicable then we would see all Gold Medals in the Olympics 10%+ Greater than the times & records of the Silver Medal.

In most competitive events the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place are a hair away from each other.

Making the fact that there is no solid 2nd place contender in Salem all that more interesting.

You just proved my point, Athletic competition in the real world is under a cap, the genetic and physiological potential of the human body, I specifically said UNCAPPED growth was a prerequisite for the appearance of the power law curve. In the presence of a cap the tendency is for a bell curve, and Olympic athletes are the extreme 6th sigma end of the human curve.

But look at ANYTHING else that humans compete in where they are not capped and you get the power-law distribution, Most famous people, Richest people etc etc. Hell even crap Facebook games will show the same pattern, every heard of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_Clicker, you'll see the same pattern their.

That you actually find the state of Salem's Humor curve 'interesting' seems to indicate to me that you've been applying the wrong paradigm for some time, their is nothing surprising going on, and I arguably nothing 'wrong' with the present curve either. I think you should made all design decisions under the assumption it will remain this way forever because the only way to get rid of it is to cap humor growth which I know you don't want.

[RonPaulFTW]

'A Player should be allowed to break into my base & kill my character if he......"
'...is in the top 10% humors on the server'

makes sense - this player has worked hard on his character - walls and braziers are no hindrance if he wants to risk such a valuable character

'...has purchased a cannon that cost 5,000 silver'

makes sense - spent a lot of money on explosive toys

'...has gotten a player to full membership status in my town'

makes sense - infiltrators can be deadly

'....has my scent'

makes sense - but how do I break into the base without one of the above? Is there some idea of a mechanic that breaking into a base is easier if you have scents?

[ImpalerWrG]

The first 3 things (high humor, cannon, infiltrator) are all ways to break into a base.
The last one (scent) is a way to kill a character who leaves a defenseless lean-too in the woods, but currently anyone worth killing will be in a base.

If I have base-break-in capability but no scent all I can do is property crime (steal, vandalism, arson), which may be adequate to make a player rage quit.
If I have scent but no base-break-in capability I can stamp my foot outside their fortress and talk trash on the forums, which is unlikely to make anyone quit.

Currently any of us would rather have break-in capability then a scent if you could only have one, because I can hurt a persons property with just a break-in capability and I can do jack with just scent. Obviously getting both is best of all then I can both kill them AND destroy their base, which has a high likelihood of making them rage quit and even if it doesn't it will be ages if ever that they can retaliate against me.


Now as much as I acknowledge this is a bad situation. HOW could scent be a break in method that is restricted to just the perpetrators base? Sure we could do things like "the criminals braziers don't fight on you when you have scent of them", but then the criminal just puts his leantoo on an an innocent alts claim, or puts all the defense in the alts claim while keeping his own claim postage stamp in size surrounded by these phalanxes?

I think the central PROBLEM is the base-break-in paradigm as a prerequisite in the first place and the central part of that is Walls as a absolute barrier to interaction with anything on the other side.

Maybe we just say that a person can be summoned from the edge of the claim they are on leantoo'ed on. And a wall not on a claim can simply be climbed over. This means their is no break-in at all necessary to do a summoning, but this seems too easy. Their needs to be some 'if I.., if they..' back and forth. Maybe we need DIFFERENT defensive measures and counter measures to defend property and characters, only then can we make scent relevant to weakening/breaching character defenses without allowing them to be abused as means to attack the property of innocents and or the use of such property as a shield, if you want to destroy the property of an innocent you go buy a cannon.

[JohnCarver]

makes sense - but how do I break into the base without one of the above? Is there some idea of a mechanic that breaking into a base is easier if you have scents?

It is certainly on the table.