Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Here you can talk about everything related to The Exiled.
User avatar
TKs-Mengelito
Vanguard Supporter
Posts: 25
Joined: 11 May 2016, 14:37

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby TKs-Mengelito » 27 May 2016, 16:07

zerus wrote:Maybe part of yours, but not of mine. Sorry to take you as an example, but it's fitting. You guys are 10+ players in Alpha, we are like 4. Instead of trying to recruit 6 more players, I will not login and wait until there's a force I can fight with my numbers :P


I really want to smack talk here but I wanna say instead why don't you make friends with the Rainbows or the Kittens? Rainbows are atleast 6! The politics, the drama and the propaganda/the flex is one of the best parts of these rare games where you have this kind of freedom! Don't give up now the raid has barely even started yet
The Khans - Wasteland Rockstars.
Image

User avatar
dbltnk
Game Developer
Posts: 2544
Joined: 27 Feb 2014, 12:52

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby dbltnk » 27 May 2016, 16:32

zerus wrote:Maybe the solution is like Pavlov said is to limit big guilds outside of the actual fight. But I personally think that the combat itself should be the solution.

My experience with Shadowbane and (to a lesser degree) Darkfall show me that it is definitely possible for smaller group to out-play larger ones without just relying on AoEs. I'll have a look at how the current state of the game plays out in the larger alpha test with the larger world map (to be announced soon) and then figure out if our current respawn system is too forgiving for zergs.

And if anyone finds a smart idea of how to restrict clan sizes that cannot be circumvented by creating multiple clans / alts / mules then please hit me with your ideas. I'm listening. =D

User avatar
TKs-Mengelito
Vanguard Supporter
Posts: 25
Joined: 11 May 2016, 14:37

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby TKs-Mengelito » 27 May 2016, 16:37

dbltnk wrote:
zerus wrote:Maybe the solution is like Pavlov said is to limit big guilds outside of the actual fight. But I personally think that the combat itself should be the solution.

My experience with Shadowbane and (to a lesser degree) Darkfall show me that it is definitely possible for smaller group to out-play larger ones without just relying on AoEs. I'll have a look at how the current state of the game plays out in the larger alpha test with the larger world map (to be announced soon) and then figure out if our current respawn system is too forgiving for zergs.

And if anyone finds a smart idea of how to restrict clan sizes that cannot be circumvented by creating multiple clans / alts / mules then please hit me with your ideas. I'm listening. =D


Perhaps it was your point here but yeah can't restrict clan sizes, it's impossible and will only lead to sabotage in other clans, proxy clans etc. can't keep people from not fighting or working together in one way or the other. Gangs today share a teamspeak or mumble and coop goes well beyond any borders imposed by the game. PVP windows like there is now makes people group up at certain times, perhaps smaller gangs would have a better chance if there where more windows or if resources and whatnot where not "safe" after a certain timelimit? I've seen this in other games where certain gangs dominate certain hours etc.

EDIT: This also makes intel valuable, when does pvp god Mengelito go to bed at night and where is the enemies weak points and when do we strike etc.
The Khans - Wasteland Rockstars.
Image

zerus
Wiki Content Creator
Posts: 202
Joined: 04 Nov 2015, 21:00

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby zerus » 27 May 2016, 16:49

TKs-Mengelito wrote:
zerus wrote:Maybe part of yours, but not of mine. Sorry to take you as an example, but it's fitting. You guys are 10+ players in Alpha, we are like 4. Instead of trying to recruit 6 more players, I will not login and wait until there's a force I can fight with my numbers :P


I really want to smack talk here but I wanna say instead why don't you make friends with the Rainbows or the Kittens? Rainbows are atleast 6! The politics, the drama and the propaganda/the flex is one of the best parts of these rare games where you have this kind of freedom! Don't give up now the raid has barely even started yet


You can smack talk all you want. Thats part of the fun, it's just a game in the end!

The reason I'm not teaming up with other clans to boost numbers is because this is just an endless struggle. We team up with rainbows to have 10 people, you counter-recruit to get more numbers again. We then find more people to join forces with etc.
This makes the game, like Sven said, more about propaganda and guild recruitment than anything else. I've lead a 150 man guild before. Never doing that again. Just not worth my time.

We even told new players to go find or form other clans before they think about joining us, but that we'd offer them help if needed.

My experience with Shadowbane and (to a lesser degree) Darkfall show me that it is definitely possible for smaller group to out-play larger ones without just relying on AoEs. I'll have a look at how the current state of the game plays out in the larger alpha test with the larger world map (to be announced soon) and then figure out if our current respawn system is too forgiving for zergs.


I can't talk for Shadowbane. But I can talk about ArcheAge, Albion, Black Desert and all the other "PvP Sandbox MMOs". They're all heavily rewarding the biggest guilds and pushing small guilds out of the game/force them to join up bigger guilds.

The game that does it best is EVE Online, but primarily because they just have areas that are completely uninteresting for big corps to go into, where small corps can duke it out. While big alliances are fighting over territory in nullsec, small gangs are fighting over dominance in lowsec areas.

And if anyone finds a smart idea of how to restrict clan sizes that cannot be circumvented by creating multiple clans / alts / mules then please hit me with your ideas. I'm listening. =D


Well the primary question for me is whether or not you even want that. There are definitely ways to limit player numbers, whether thats by design(strong diminishing returns, many split fights over smaller objectives) or by technical means(instancing, phasing, arena system).

But just because I think skill-based combat and endless numbers contradict each other doesn't mean it should be changed, right?

EDIT: This also makes intel valuable, when does pvp god Mengelito go to bed at night and where is the enemies weak points and when do we strike etc.


Think we just have different philosophies. For me it's more like "When are enough people online to have good fights?"

User avatar
dbltnk
Game Developer
Posts: 2544
Joined: 27 Feb 2014, 12:52

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby dbltnk » 27 May 2016, 17:41

zerus wrote:I can't talk for Shadowbane. But I can talk about ArcheAge, Albion, Black Desert and all the other "PvP Sandbox MMOs". They're all heavily rewarding the biggest guilds and pushing small guilds out of the game/force them to join up bigger guilds.

The game that does it best is EVE Online, but primarily because they just have areas that are completely uninteresting for big corps to go into, where small corps can duke it out. While big alliances are fighting over territory in nullsec, small gangs are fighting over dominance in lowsec areas.

And if anyone finds a smart idea of how to restrict clan sizes that cannot be circumvented by creating multiple clans / alts / mules then please hit me with your ideas. I'm listening. =D


Well the primary question for me is whether or not you even want that. There are definitely ways to limit player numbers, whether thats by design(strong diminishing returns, many split fights over smaller objectives) or by technical means(instancing, phasing, arena system).

But just because I think skill-based combat and endless numbers contradict each other doesn't mean it should be changed, right?

Two souls, alas, are housed within my breast.

On the one hand I agree that smaller fights tend to be the ones that I enjoy more. And I will make sure that there are some mechanics in the game that make those more likely and common. Splitting groups between multiple PoIs, for example (sieges). Dumb AoEs. Etc.

But on the other hand, this is not an arena-based game where you are guaranteed to have even sides. Recruiting and diplomacy are part of an Sandbox MMO and they will be important tools in winning big wars. More numbers will be helpful. My goal is to make it so that a high skill difference between groups can account for a large difference in manpower. If 5 people always win versus 4 then my game is broken. If 5 skilled people only 1/3rd of all fights versus 15 people then the game's still good.

zerus
Wiki Content Creator
Posts: 202
Joined: 04 Nov 2015, 21:00

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby zerus » 27 May 2016, 18:04

Goething it up in here!

My goal is to make it so that a high skill difference between groups can account for a large difference in manpower. If 5 people always win versus 4 then my game is broken. If 5 skilled people only 1/3rd of all fights versus 15 people then the game's still good.


Thats a tough goal to have, but I can get behind that. Especially because this means that even fights aren't out of the equation.

So what I get from this is that theoretically, things like diminishing returns on numbers and generally mechanics discouraging zergs in some ways are within the game's vision, but zerg-based guilds in general aren't supposed to be just cut away by for example instanced sieges, and should still be part of the game?

User avatar
dbltnk
Game Developer
Posts: 2544
Joined: 27 Feb 2014, 12:52

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby dbltnk » 27 May 2016, 18:09

zerus wrote:So what I get from this is that theoretically, things like diminishing returns on numbers and generally mechanics discouraging zergs in some ways are within the game's vision, but zerg-based guilds in general aren't supposed to be just cut away by for example instanced sieges, and should still be part of the game?

Exactly!

zerus
Wiki Content Creator
Posts: 202
Joined: 04 Nov 2015, 21:00

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby zerus » 27 May 2016, 18:50

dbltnk wrote:
zerus wrote:So what I get from this is that theoretically, things like diminishing returns on numbers and generally mechanics discouraging zergs in some ways are within the game's vision, but zerg-based guilds in general aren't supposed to be just cut away by for example instanced sieges, and should still be part of the game?

Exactly!


In that case, I suppose it's fine if I yell about zergs all day and give the perspective on my small-scale focused PvP interest? :D

User avatar
Pavlov
Seeker Supporter
Posts: 115
Joined: 13 Jun 2014, 17:02

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby Pavlov » 27 May 2016, 20:27

TKs-Mengelito wrote:Perhaps it was your point here but yeah can't restrict clan sizes, it's impossible and will only lead to sabotage in other clans, proxy clans etc. can't keep people from not fighting or working together in one way or the other. Gangs today share a teamspeak or mumble and coop goes well beyond any borders imposed by the game. PVP windows like there is now makes people group up at certain times, perhaps smaller gangs would have a better chance if there where more windows or if resources and whatnot where not "safe" after a certain timelimit? I've seen this in other games where certain gangs dominate certain hours etc.

EDIT: This also makes intel valuable, when does pvp god Mengelito go to bed at night and where is the enemies weak points and when do we strike etc.


To be clear, the real concern here isn't about larger clans existing, it's about clans getting big enough to overpower an entire server. We're meant to have smaller gameworlds than what a lot of guilds might be used to, so it's not unlikely that one of those guilds could effectively control an entire server.

For instance, I am a Something Awful goon. Goons haven't shown much interest in the game so far, but they're also fickle and prone to suddenly rushing games. What happens if 100 active goons show up on a server with open recruiting and a kill-on-sight policy otherwise? Other guilds and solos join up for safety, and the clan gets even bigger. Now we control a large portion of the map. The remaining players either need to consolidate as well (with or against goons), or get steamrolled, get discouraged, and leave. You either end up with a map that's essentially team1 vs team2, or goons push out everyone then leave themselves when there's nobody left to fight. All of those players may or may not even come back to the game at all.

This isn't really ideal.

There are plenty of large gaming communities that could do something similar, so this is something the game has to prepare for. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to be big and powerful, but they can't be allowed to get the kind of critical mass that can lock down an entire server. Even forcing a guild to break up into guilds goon1, goon2, and goon3 can help. It encourages sectarianism. Maybe goon3 decides they don't like the leadership and sets up their own independent fiefdom. Then the head of goon1 declares war on goon2 because they're bored and someone in goon2 keeps using a meme they don't like. It's way more fun to collapse from mismanagement and infighting than to end a server 2 weeks in with "gg 2 zerg goons win".

But the sorts of imposed downsides to large single clans/alliances I suggested earlier can still work if you can convince people to stay in those guilds anyway. There's already a basis for that right now. Guild members get blue nametags (very helpful in chaotic fights), icons on the map, more favorable friendly fire mechanics, can cooperate capturing points, get access to base resources etc. If you keep adding little conveniences like that, it can go a long way to convincing people use the clan system even with large-clan downsides. If they try to avoid those downsides by not being in the same clan/alliance, then they're missing out on the conveniences and tactical advantages that other, smaller clans will have. That's a disadvantage in itself.

It may also be worth only allowing players to join one clan per X hour period, or have some cost to joining/leaving a clan, to avoid jumping clans to cheese the system.

zerus
Wiki Content Creator
Posts: 202
Joined: 04 Nov 2015, 21:00

Re: Direction/Vision for Group/Skill-Based PvP?

Postby zerus » 27 May 2016, 20:55

Goons are the perfect example of a guild that mostly wins by numbers. Not saying they don't have skilled players, but they certainly dominate by sheer player mass and make the game less fun for pretty much for many players. Mostly the ones not in their alliance.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests