Ryzom

qmodal wrote:I am suggesting that *getting* a DP is fine, but *having* a DP is not.

I also want to make it very clear that these would not be instant and large consequences of a *single* death. For a player with an average number of deaths, the effect might be minimal. For players who don't take the trouble to stay alive, the consequences would gradually become dramatic.

OK Adayl, Clearly I'm on your team, just slightly diverse opinions. 3 points here.

1. Your getting a DP is very very very similar to having a dp, just having more limited ways to "fix it" Some of your ideas do not fit this theory. If I lose lvls, I have to work to get them back. If I lose Fame, I have to work to get that back. If my armor wears out quicker, I need to work to provide mats or dapper to get new armor. All seems like *having* a DP to me, how is this more satisfying?

2. Interesting idea about having a sliding scale for DP. I really like this, the mechanics of it need some work(different thread to follow soon after), is it in-game time between deaths? Does going a longer time without a death fix whatever is affected? Can I log in and sit at the stables for the overnight or for the weekend and have my "DP fixed"?

3. I *love* the idea of having some identifier that is visible that shows a characters propensity to death. Of course then I may not group with some of my guildmates. Can we also have visual identifiers for fame or a way I can see someone's fame.

Off topic, Why shouldn't a group have fame, and the group be affected by tribes/etc as a whole? Maybe I will add a thread for this.

madnak wrote:I played FFXI, and exploration was very rare. My background is with MUDs so maybe this is "normal" in an MMORPG, but the exploration was terrible in that game. I never did run across another player who was willing to lose 2 levels running around looking for new things. The only reason anyone ever left the popular regions of the game was to get l3wt. People refused to do even relatively simple things like Garrison because they were afraid of dying. "Want to have some fun and try a Garrison?" "Not unless we have 18 people who know what they're doing and have done it before." Or even "Garrison's not worth it." And certain burning circle monsters I couldn't find anyone to help with even if I provided the seals because they didn't drop good enough items.



"Poor player decision?" I've maxed my dp many, many times, and would still be willing to do so if it maxed at 8 million instead of 800k. I don't regret one point of it and my decisions were just right if you ask me. You can't explore without dying. Especially not in a game like this where aggro means a fight to the death. Exploration is all about risk, and if you take risks sometimes you're going to get the bad end of the stick.

It sounds like you're suggesting we have a system where players are terrified of taking risks and nobody does anything adventurous or anything that I, for one, consider fun. If I want to play a game where everyone stays 10 feet from the town square and kills rabbits until they are maximum level, I'll go somewhere else. If I want to play a game where taking on a challenge or doing something fun is only possible if it gives uber l3wt or is 100% safe, I'll go somewhere else. I'm playing this game specifically to get away from that kind of thing, which is a deal-breaker for me.

Err... you've taken both of those comments out of context and made a complete left turn on them. My entire post was regarding how Death Penalties are applied and/or modified in SoR, and in MMOs in general.

But, to entertain your comments... The reference to whether or not you could explore in FFXI has nothing at all to do with the game's death penalty. You can explore any time you want. And, I happen to agree with you on that - FFXI gave little to no incentive to explore. The areas felt more like filler in-between points-of-interest than unexplored land waiting to be discovered. And, even if your only intention is to explore.. that doesn't change the fact that hte mobs' intention is to kill you. But that has nothing to do with the game's death penalty.

And I'm not suggesting that the game force people to be afraid to leave the safety of their starter town. It sounds to me like you'd prefer a system that allows you to put up some "I'm just exploring" flag so mobs will leave you alone and won't attack you. That simply won't happen. You want to explore, it's at your own risk - and you know exactly what the risks are when you set out. I used to purposely take my character through areas many levels higher than me all the time in FFXI - just for the challenge of making it through alive. I jokingly called it "The Fine Art of Mob Dodging". If I succeeded, then great! But I never complained or felt it unfair if I got killed because I knew that was a real risk when I decided to do it. Similarly, I escorted other players through those same areas sometimes if they felt like going to a different city, or had to go to Jeuno, etc. When we left, they knew full well there was a risk of their dying. If that bothered them too much, they didn't go. If you feel the penalty is too stiff to make exploration of certain areas worthwhile... then wait until you're high enough level to better insure your survival. Don't blame the death penalty.

The second point was me responding to what was posted earlier in the thread about someone stating - negatively - that they would rack up 400k+ in DP if they'd tried to solo through a particularly rough area in SoR. I was saying that if they - personally - were opposed to dying and racking up DP, then repeatedly trying to go through an area they know is too high level for them is a flaw in their decision making. If you know a fire is going to burn you, and you don't want to be burned, but you repeatedly stick your hand in and get burned... is it the fire's fault, or your own for not learning the first or second time?

Again, I don't know where that brought you to your defense of exploration. If you love exploring despite the risks.. that's great. I'm right with you on that. But that's not what I was talking about.

The DP system as it is instated, in my oppinion, is good, and doesn't need 'tweaking' or 'adjusting' or even 'changing'

Its logical for "This" game, and works as it is intended from my perspective.

Stiffer penalties discourage exploration. Exploration means death, the harsher death is the less likely people are to explore. I'll explore no matter what. But in games I've played, usually the harsher the dp, the less exploration I see happening. DP affects many things in a game, and risk is one of the big ones. The higher the dp, the less players will want to risk death. Therefore, the more they'll "play it safe" and the less adventurous they'll be. So exploring in a group will be much harder. It will tend to segregate the "power-gamers" who never try to do anything that doesn't get them good, reliable experience and the "explorers" who can't keep up in level. It will prevent exploration being an option for casual gamers (how is a casual gamer going to handle a stiffer dp limit?).

The level of death penalty has a major impact on the culture and community of a game, not just on game elements.

I really like suggestion 1, death decreases fame.
Combine that with a reduced DP penalty and I think you've got something.

I might also suggest there be a 3 day time limit on DP.
If you get really frustrated with your Ryzom DP, take a 3 day break, and when you return, you'll be back to your old self with a fresh, new perspective.

I want a graveyard near each major home city, so when a person comes from noob island and dies on the mainland, they get a tombstone in the graveyard, each consecutive death, the tombstone has a number that increases.

So people can go to the graveyard, click on the tombstones, and see details on how many times that poor person died, with some querky saying about what killed them last.

Here Lies (enter name)
After a (enter mob) mangled
this poor (enter sex), and sent
them to (enter some diety)

(start life) - (last death)

Start life is from last respawn.

To me, this would be more fun that trying to figure out who gets what DP and why.

zumwalt wrote:The DP system as it is instated, in my oppinion, is good, and doesn't need 'tweaking' or 'adjusting' or even 'changing'

Its logical for "This" game, and works as it is intended from my perspective.

I agree with you here. Why try to change the death penalty system to something that resembles what another game has. Nevrax has implemented what they feel is the best for this game so just accept it.

If anyone feels death should have more impact, then just try avoiding death. I've found in this game that death will find you no matter what steps you take to avoid it. I've seen entire parties wiped out fighting creature well within their level due to frequent special attacks that are one shot kills and likewise. Death in this game if very easy to come by.

I appreciate all the replies. I see lots of stuff I disagree with, but no-one has flamed and the opinions are all thoughtful. That's almost unique in the forums.

I want to hammer away at a single issue here until I find the words that make it clear what I think the issue is. The issue is *not* about making death something innocuous, nor taking away challenge, nor even changing the existing nature of the game.

Let's try this way of looking at it:

The phrase "death penalty" is ambiguous. It can refer to the perception that dying is a penalty (or undesirable outcome) to players. Or it can refer to a specific unpleasant alteration to game play that happens as a result of dying, which affects game play after you die. The two concepts may overlap a little bit but they are different.

Most of you are saying that you want dying to be unpleasant, because you think people should want to avoid dying. IOW, you want dying to be a penalty. Fine, I say, go for it. Make it nastier in Ryzom than it is now, if you want, because it currently isn't extremely nasty in this game.

You don't have to argue back at me that death should be nasty, or that dying should be discouraged, because I'm not disagreeing with you. Or agreeing with you. I am talking about the other kind of death penalty.

When there is a Ryzom-style DP (50K XP, or 500K XP, or whatever), yes, death is nastier than without it. Death is a penalty because you don't want the DP.

But Ryzom-style DP is *also* the second kind of penalty, a penalty to your life after death. For a while -- a short while or a long while, depending on circumstances -- after you spring back to life, nothing you do gets you anywhere except to the end of your DP. All you are doing is grinding, and this has no purpose other than to allow you to stop grinding. There is no reward other than the eventual cessation of penalty.

These DP recovery phases of my Ryzom are not fun for me, and I can't say I've met anyone who has claimed to like them. The best I've ever heard is something along the lines of "It's not so bad, when compared with Everquest [or Lineage II or whatever]."

If Ryzom-style DP was the only way to make death unpalatable, then I guess I might be acceptant of the situation. But I have tried to make the argument that there are plenty of ways of putting teeth into death's bite, without leaving the player to bleed XP for minutes or hours or days or weeks afterwards.

Am I getting my point across? So we don't need anyone to re-confirm the general consensus that death shouldn't be nerfed, yes?

If you think that what I propose is just substituting one life-after-death grind for another, then speak up. If you are right, then I am wrong.

If you think that there is some value, in a $15 per month game designed for entertainment purposes, of slogging through the grind, then speak up. If you are right, then I am wrong.

If you think that there is no way to make death off-putting *without* a life-after-death penalty, then speak up. If you are right, then I am wrong.

Any other issues should go to a different thread. OK?

Adayl

I think there have been some very well thought out post so far, though I do not agree with all of them. I feel the DP system is ok as is, but would not mind some changes either. The graveyard idea though ... that I like alot!

I understand what you are talking about. I would rather see death MUCH less impossible to avoid in certain circumstances. For instance, what about a GAS mask (should be player made and a higher end item, and cost quite a bit to make/buy) to avoid gas.

How about mobs not being able to hit you when they are 200 meters away and they are using melee?

How about mobs giving UP on the pursuit when you are "out of smell range" say 400 meters or so?

I understand what you are talking about. Having to work off a dp is not THAT different than having to regain the xp in EQ (or the LEVEL in EQ for that matter, although in EQ you could lose a skill/spell etc in Ryzom you can't).

And under 100...DP is cake, forage for 30 minutes TOPS and a maxed out DP is GONE. I am sure post 150 it is a totally different discussion, hours maybe two days casual play.

And to be honest, there is NOTHING thrilling about sitting at a zoneline for the fifth or even SIXTH hour waiting for agro mobs to move, knowing they don't plan on it soon. That is pure garden fertilizer!

I am bored, why? because I am an explorer...who can NOT explore a VIVID and VIBRANT world with a sky that reminds me of my inlaws' ranch sky at new moon (I can see every star than ANY human eye can see any where on earth there. It would take your breath away.). I can see just enough to want MORE, but I can't until I grind another month or two.

I don't have any suggestions on this. I can only say the Horizons didn't get this any better than Ryzom did (Horizon does not have ENOUGH agro mobs, you can run from one side of it to the other, or do a FULL circle of the land and avoid ALL agro. WHOA how exciting *YAWN*).