Lowering the Barriers to Group PvP

Mishgul · March 2015

Going off the point. We are talking about lowering the barriers to group PvP, not about the cumulative negative consequences of random death.

Jovolo · March 2015

Mishgul said:

The negative consequence of starburst is that in the majority of situations that you starburst, you will likely die again, in my experience. I lose a lot of my abilities on starburst, preventing me from being useful in a fight if I am in one, such as my baalzadeen, or viridian.

I can't answer your second question.

There are penalties to death currently, beyond losing xp. Losing xp just happens to be another penalty. Being not alive is not a useful state of being for one. When you die you the lose time that you spent up to being dead trying not to be dead. You may have lost resources such as curatives, essence and whatever else you may have used to try not to be dead up until you died. If you do not have someone to rezz for you, you lose the time spent dead that you could be using to play the game. Even if you have someone to rezz you, you will still be wasting a fair amount of time not being alive.

That is a lot of negative effects on your gameplay already.

The people who do not care about these things, and the people who like/do not care/are ambivalent towards XP loss are all pretty involved in PvP already. If you are talking about lowering the barrier to PvP, then XP loss, in my opinion, is the next biggest barrier in terms of getting people who play the game on a more casual basis involved.

I don't get your first point about starburst in this hypothetical situation. If losing starburst has a negative consequence of being more likely to die, but death itself is not a negative consequence because you no longer lose experience on death, then how is starburst a negative consequence at all? It doesn't become a double-edged sword but instead almost a necessity (or rather, you'd be silly to not use one). If death is meaningful outside of losing experience, then it's the death itself that is the negative consequence and removing experience loss would solve nothing because people would still get frustrated (and complain) about dying. So really, we're solving nothing other than the "difficulty" of getting Dragon by making it far easier (an inevitability rather than a struggle) to attain.

I'm in a strange position where I don't really see a major reason for keeping experience loss, but I don't really see good reasons placed against it. So far it has just been "People don't like dying and it makes the game unfun" - well a lot of negative consequences make the game unfun, should we remove them all and just make the game very simplistic and easy?

I'm completely in the camp that doesn't like bashing, I think gaining experience via PvE is tedious, time-consuming and just plain dull. If bashing was made to be more fun, and more interesting dynamic consequences were introduced on death/kills, then you could probably either keep or remove experience loss and no one would really care.

Still waiting on the verdict from @Sarapis or @Tecton as to why they feel experience loss is a necessary mechanic. I would assume it would have previously been some kind of gating mechanic where the more 2+ organisations/groups/persons participate in PK, the more often one side will die theoretically, and a victor is eventually decided in a conflict because only Wulfen wants to drop back down to level 5.

Klendathu · March 2015

Is there not already zero XP loss for defenders after a raid is sanctioned? If you're the one raiding, you accept the consequences. If you're being raided, the consequences are already vastly reduced.

What about those people who want to get good at group PvP without worrying about XP loss? Arena.

Jovolo · March 2015

Mishgul said:

Going off the point. We are talking about lowering the barriers to group PvP, not about the cumulative negative consequences of random death.

I think the discussion about removing experience loss is pretty much the entire agenda of this thread, as it's Jacen's foremost standpoint in the argument of how to make PK easier for "Casual PvPers" to get into. Sure there are probably other ways, but this is definitely the most prominent and contented point at the minute, and it probably will be until an admin settles the issue and gives an official opinion on one way or the other.

Mishgul · March 2015

I was talking about him arguing about removing other negative consequences. My point is that removing xp loss itself will lower the barrier of PvP. I am neither for or against it personally, but this is an observation that I have tried to make with hypothetical statements.

If we are happy with PvP as it is, then that is that.

Jovolo · March 2015

I completely agree that it would lower the barrier to group PvP. I just don't know if that would necessarily be a good thing, though, because it wouldn't be the only consequence of removing experience loss. That's my take on it anyway.

Klendathu · March 2015

My point was that if XP loss is removed for PvP, what happens if people still don't PvP? Someone else will say it's curative usage, that potentially gets removed, and so on. I know it's an extreme example, hence reducto absurdium, and XP loss has already been massively reduced in the last 10 years.

Mishgul · March 2015

Yes and more people have been taking more risks over the years, and the PKing elites have slowly grown into a much bigger group also, because they are more willing to take a few hits to learn how to play better. But these people are still the kind of people that have the hours of playtime to be able to invest.

Everytime negative consequences are lessened, more people become involved in PK.

Jovolo · March 2015

Slight derail, I know, but I don't know if the PK elites have really grown bigger. To me it seems like there are less "top PKers" and just a lot more midbies that are getting better. A totally subjective analysis of course, but off the top of my head I can list maybe Mizik and Jhui? Probably Xinna and maybe Santar. I would list you but I'm not sure if you started PKing again.

I'd talk about why I think that is, but that's a totally different topic. Sounds like a fun thread, though. : >

Jules · March 2015

It's good to see that some people I wouldn't have expected are supporting (or at least playing Devil's Advocate for) the reasons why XP loss actually is a barrier to PvP. Tecton has said point blank that he won't remove XP loss, unfortunately - both Herenicus and I asked him about it in his Valentine's weekend thread. Admin do change their stance on things over time, but that's a pretty recent Q & A. He does however, have something in mind... I can't know what that is, and I admit to having doubts it could be enough. We'll see though.

(Jules said - in Tecton's thread) What is it about Achaea that makes XP loss a necessary and beneficial "consequence"? For me, this consequence means that I am always incredibly cautious about involving myself in any sort of PK related conflict - and for the most part, I do it very rarely in Achaea. I thought about taking a plunge here after another conversation about this topic, and I just can't stomach grinding Jules back up to level 80 if I start dinking around and lose it. So she'll probably continue to sit mostly dormant, bashing occasionally - very cautiously, and always things that are "safe", because in that same conversation it became clear that when you're trying to get any sort of net gain at higher levels, you have to take all death very seriously.
I've learned more about combat in less than a year over in Imperian than I did in 10+ years in Achaea, because my fear factor was removed - which meant logs with one or two things I could look at (not 50), and access to people who know things when I have stupid questions about said logs. I'm still terrible, obviously, but I'm light years ahead of myself at any other time and place. I think you were actually their producer so this probably isn't news to you.
I don't think I am remotely alone in this reticence predicated by fear of having to try to grind back up to where I was (much less eventually get a net gain again), although it's true that some people won't take the plunge even with XP loss not being a factor, due to a weird sense of pride, mainly, from what I can tell. But some people really will take that plunge given the chance to do so without crushing XP loss (and just being constantly hunted because of our infamy system).
The only thing I can come up with is that for whatever reason, it makes sense to keep players like me almost completely segregated from PvP. A possible explanation is that maybe you are worried there would be too much "zerging", which seems like it could be a problem, but a problem which also seems to have its own solutions. Maybe there are other reasons, but one of the effects really is two populations that are so segregated they really might as well be playing two difference games on the same server much of the time (which may be the intent and a feature rather than a bug as far as you are concerned).

(Tecton said) Mortori used to be the Imperian producer, yeah.

We do offer a slew of zero-loss options for PVP. Things like arenas and the like have been around for years, and let you get comfortable and familiar with your skills and combat in general at the cost of a minute amount of gold (or none, if you pick which events you want to join!)

I can definitely see where you're coming from though, and we are considering some options in terms of better handling of experience and death. It will just be finding a solution that balances "making realistic and conscientious decisions" vs. "I'm so scared of dying that I'm not going to do anything", rather than moving to a full zero-loss situation.

Alright, back to doing my best to stay away. Achaean forums bad place for me for the foreseeable future, but yeah, the right changes here could make my many thousands of dollars invested fun/worth playing with again. I spent most of Jules life casually RP-ing, exploring, and just generally doing everything but PK, because I knew that part of the game was pretty much sealed off to me. I did eventually get bored to tears... and I accidentally found a reborn Imperian, where that part of the game was no longer sealed off to most players.

Khairt · March 2015

I do not fight because it does not interest me to do so, especially if what I'm gambling on is a loss of time out of my life (which I value far more than someone else's good times). Xp loss removal would not make me suddenly interested in being a combat god. It would, however find me far more willing to engage with someone who enjoys it as a passtime, actually play the game with them instead of what I do now: eyeroll and wander off and lyre/boat should it persist. I am not an inherently generous person, but I can donate a few minutes of my time more or less to making the attempt at reasonable reaction to aggression. As it stands now, playing with fighters in their chosen venue represents more of an investment than I'm willing to make.

Tl; dr: I don't like to fight, losing xp seals the deal on my participation. I wouldn't suddenly love fighting if it were removed but I'd be more likely to indulge pvpers.

Jacen · March 2015

Jovolo said:

I completely agree that it would lower the barrier to group PvP. I just don't know if that would necessarily be a good thing, though, because it wouldn't be the only consequence of removing experience loss. That's my take on it anyway.

What other consequences would there be, and how might we address them?

My take on it is that the PK rules wouldn't change just because XP loss goes away. Furthermore, I think removing XP loss would play better into this paradigm around the ambiguous PK rule, since people would likely be less emotional about losing, since it wouldn't be equated with X time investment lost. I would wager we'd see fewer issues filed, because some people would shrug it off better.

Of course, Santar is right in that some people just don't take to losing well. There's no alternative to that, except to stop playing. But I think, for those that are okay with losing but not with losing large swaths of their time invested, removing XP loss could make PK a better experience for a lot of people, overall.

Bluef · March 2015

Everyone is discussing the short-term benefits of removing Xp loss without concerns for the long-term consequences and repercussions. We're also not talking about lowering barriers to entering PvP; we're discussing ways to make people feel like dying when they do so isn't such a big deal, especially if they want dragon; that's not the same thing.

Sasiya · March 2015

If the risk-reward ratio of engaging in PvP is weighing over too far into the risk category, new people will shy away from fighting because of the losses they are almost guaranteed to incur against more seasoned fighters. If you can fight for your God/city/house for the prestige and glory it earns you without worrying about having to spend hours and hours to recuperate, then there is incentive to participate even if you lack experience -- this is essentially lowering the entry bar to PvP. In all of the muds I've tried to get into, there was always an established clique of veteran/top-tier fighters that would steamroll anyone trying to get into combat (as it should be, people with experience/skill/equipment should defeat someone without these things). Some muds encouraged people to stick with it and improve anyway, and some muds had a steeper curve.

I don't really have any Achaea combat experience, just pointing out that the losses and setbacks you face when trying a new facet of a game effectively contributes to setting the entry bar for participation.

Jacen · March 2015

Removing XP loss is removing a barrier. Its removing the primary deterrent from engaging in PK as someone less skilled than your opponents.

Long term, I think we'd see more of a balance of power since we aren't punishing startup PKers as much. We'd probably see more Order vs Order, House vs House PK as well.

Yeah, it'd be easier to get dragon. Or well, it could be... we could also suspend PK XP gain based on... idk, KDR over the last week or something. Who knows. Anyways, dragon is an achievement, but its hardly a special snowflake anymore. 13% of people over level 30 are dragons, 35% of people over level 80.

Bluef · March 2015

Jacen said:

Removing XP loss is removing a barrier. Its removing the primary deterrent from engaging in PK as someone less skilled than your opponents.

Long term, I think we'd see more of a balance of power since we aren't punishing startup PKers as much. We'd probably see more Order vs Order, House vs House PK as well.

Yeah, it'd be easier to get dragon. Or well, it could be... we could also suspend PK XP gain based on... idk, KDR over the last week or something. Who knows. Anyways, dragon is an achievement, but its hardly a special snowflake anymore. 13% of people over level 30 are dragons, 35% of people over level 80.

I wholeheartedly disagree. The only barrier is one of perception and mindset. It takes time and the determination to get beyond short-term losses to obtain dragon and anything over Logosian. Time PKing or time hunting. That's why dragon is such a great achievement.

Removing XP loss would weaken that achievement in so many ways. You'd also not see any balance in power; if anything, those cities that already have a plethora of dragons would simply have more (in general and in comparison to any other city).

While you might see more people PKing, the fact that death would be essentially meaningless would mean that the conflicts themselves would lack any real substance beyond shrine defilement. Orders that don't currently PvP would also not suddenly gain an interest in it just because XP loss was tempered.

Yes, 13% of the active players are dragon -- that's why it's an achievement. When only over 10% of the playerbase of the game has done it, you can call it that. If you make it so that there's no XP loss and we end up with 25-50% or more of the realm becoming dragon quite easily since there's no negative feedback loop associated with dying. The achievement will totally diminished.

There is nothing about being a dragon that equates to being a "special snowflake" in any way. You're using the term incorrectly whilst simultaneously ignoring the idea of achievement in favor of more conflict.

Austere · March 2015

If xp loss is removed, can dragons get an honors line saying when they achieved dragon? I would hope this data is stored somewhere. This way, I can look down upon anyone who got it after the change for their inferior accomplishment.

Nim · March 2015

How does EXP loss give death substance in a meaningful way? I think a ton of conflict in the game is utterly void of meaning, and the fact someone might lose EXP doesn't help that at all. It's just a nuisance and a way of punishing the players for daring to try to have fun. If people actually enjoy PVE, I say, again, that denizens should hire on regular enemies to force PVE players into PVP, since it's already done to PVP players, why not?

As a side note, I don't see why PvP XP gains couldn't be limited severely or removed to prevent people from getting their hardcore achievements by playing the game how they want to, if that's really important to people. I just don't see why it's common sense not to force activity X on people wanting to do activity Y. Like, what if designers had to fight a miniboss to get their designs back, or sexalts have to take on leadership roles to mudsex, or etc.

Herenicus · March 2015

I'm not sure XP loss as described is an NFL, @Bluef; just to keep the terminology clear, remember that NFLs operate to rubber-band the cars in a race a bit closer together.

An example of an XP-related NFL could include increasingly-steep XP penalties at high levels and decreasingly-generous bonuses at low levels, designed to bring everyone closer in. It makes sense in racing games, where it's fun to race against other cars, but NFLs make less sense in terms of this XP conversation.

Anyone with an interest in the terminology can read the article here: https://learn.canvas.net/courses/3/pages/level-4-dot-4-feedback-loops

With that, I hand this adventure back over to Jacen and his Argonauts.

Nim · March 2015

EXP loss is a positive feedback loop, actually.

Atalkez · March 2015

I want to get Dragon in my 1 hour of playtime purely through pvp. No consequences plz.

Seriously though, I'd like to know if this is even something the administration is even going to consider.

Mishgul · March 2015

Dragon is not a great achievement, it's a really annoying and boring achievement, considering how average it is in the grand scheme of PvP and hunting compared to other classes. The removal of xp loss won't make it any less annoying or boring to get to dragon. I set aside sometime and bashed from 80ish to dragon in under 3 weeks. Removing PvP xp loss would not have changed that.

Removing PvP xp loss won't really affect the achievement of dragon in anyway except you can't be griefed out of dragon. I don't even think it's possible to lose dragon unless you actively went out of your way to die tha tmany times. I have been within the first 5% of level 99 for many years now, at one point even actively fighting as Mhaldorian against 5 cities actively attacking us . It's no big deal. I can die as many times as I want and i would struggle to lose dragon.

If someone genuinely wants dragon (and doesn't just say it while not doing anything), they would get it no matter whether they are losing XP or not.

All that said, I am pretty sure nothing is being done in these regards by the admin.

Bluef · March 2015

Herenicus said:
I'm not sure XP loss as described is an NFL, @Bluef; just to keep the terminology clear, remember that NFLs operate to rubber-band the cars in a race a bit closer together.

I'm fairly certain XP loss is a NFL, at least according to the article you shared just a couple weeks ago, "Negative feedback loops also have three important properties:

They tend to stabilize the game, causing players to tend towards the center of the pack.
They cause the game to take longer.
They put emphasis on the late game, since early-game decisions are reduced in their impact over time."

XP loss does all all this. Similarly, the health pool gains at each new level, the lowered XP loss costs at higher levels, etc. are PFLs.

Nim said:

How does EXP loss give death substance in a meaningful way? I think a ton of conflict in the game is utterly void of meaning, and the fact someone might lose EXP doesn't help that at all. It's just a nuisance and a way of punishing the players for daring to try to have fun. If people actually enjoy PVE, I say, again, that denizens should hire on regular enemies to force PVE players into PVP, since it's already done to PVP players, why not?

As a side note, I don't see why PvP XP gains couldn't be limited severely or removed to prevent people from getting their hardcore achievements by playing the game how they want to, if that's really important to people. I just don't see why it's common sense not to force activity X on people wanting to do activity Y. Like, what if designers had to fight a miniboss to get their designs back, or sexalts have to take on leadership roles to mudsex, or etc.

Death is not a nuisance in Achaea. It's a potential consequence of certain actions. A nuisance would be the way death used to be handled in Imperian (that whole gather tokens things, bleh); it was uninteresting and annoying to have to repeat that cycle over and over. Again, this is all about mindset and perception though. You think it's a bother and irritation, whereas most people who have achieved dragon will tell you that with every death they've learned something, ie. how to battle a particular mob/denizen, how to address a particular PvP tactic, etc.

Massively had an interesting article on death mechanics last year and I think it said what I'm trying to really well:

"The death of our characters may be inconvenient when we want to plough through content, but penalizing failure is an essential part of any MMO and further incentivises success by making you learn from your mistakes. As much as players crave gratification through rewards and progression, they also need to feel that such progress has been well-earned and greatly deserved."

"No matter how death penalties are presented, some sort of risk and consequence is a necessary evil, otherwise the game and our journey would feel meaningless."

Jacen · March 2015

XP loss is not a negative feedback. The cap at 80 alone ensures this. It impacts the less successful far more than the more successful. XP loss isn't emphasized in the late game, it practically disappears completely.

Bluef · March 2015

Mishgul said:

Dragon is not a great achievement, it's a really annoying and boring achievement, considering how average it is in the grand scheme of PvP and hunting compared to other classes. The removal of xp loss won't make it any less annoying or boring to get to dragon. I set aside sometime and bashed from 80ish to dragon in under 3 weeks. Removing PvP xp loss would not have changed that.

Removing PvP xp loss won't really affect the achievement of dragon in anyway except you can't be griefed out of dragon. I don't even think it's possible to lose dragon unless you actively went out of your way to die tha tmany times. I have been within the first 5% of level 99 for many years now, at one point even actively fighting as Mhaldorian against 5 cities actively attacking us . It's no big deal. I can die as many times as I want and i would struggle to lose dragon.

If someone genuinely wants dragon (and doesn't just say it while not doing anything), they would get it no matter whether they are losing XP or not.

All that said, I am pretty sure nothing is being done in these regards by the admin.

The idea that dragon isn't an achievement is your opinion. Sure, a lot of people share this perception, but that doesn't make it reality.

I had a really great time getting to dragon. Was it a grind? Sure. But most every achievement usually requires some frustration and hard work. More than that, the experience was fun though too. People I like playing with came together to support my drive toward it. I was given grove rains, herbs and refills, help in finding better hunting areas, tips on fighting mobs, and most of all motivation; if it weren't for people saying, "You can do this!" I might not have kept at it. But 3 months into my quest, I was there. The ceremony was meaningful, not just to me but to everyone who helped me out.

The same thing applies today as I'm getting up near 30% of 103; people I enjoy playing with continue to encourage me and share their journey toward dragon and beyond and I try to return the favours that were paid to me previously.

To be honest, you already can't really be "griefed out of dragon." Dragons lose .5% each time they die. Most new dragons create a buffer when they first gain the rank (or prior to even going dragon) to ensure that multiple deaths won't result in loss of the level. Do some people forego this and lose that level? Sure. But that's a choice they make and the risk involved has a consequence as it should.

I agree that I don't think the admin are going to do anything abut XP loss and I'm happy about that. With the loss of so much history lately due to the destruction of Houses via the Renaissance, nerfing the dragon achievement by putting its acquisition on easy mode would probably be the last straw for some long-time players.

Jovolo · March 2015

Because they earned more xp to begin with...?

Bluef · March 2015

Jacen said:

XP loss is not a negative feedback. The cap at 80 alone ensures this. It impacts the less successful far more than the more successful. XP loss isn't emphasized in the late game, it practically disappears completely.

XP Loss stablizes the game, causing players to tend toward levels 70-80, which is the center of the pack. Likewise, it causes the quest for dragon, an 'end game' type goal for some players, to take longer. These are NFL characteristics.

Nim · March 2015

Dragons suffer less from XP loss. Getting good let's you avoid it. It encourages and rewards getting more powerful, while punishes people for failure. It's a positive feedback loop per-person, while being a net drain on the system as a whole, since EXP is lost. It arguably functions as both on a systematic level, since there's a curve for the time it takes to recover EXP lost that punishes people for leveling... and then rewards them again.

Bluef · March 2015

Nim said:

Dragons suffer less from XP loss. Getting good let's you avoid it. It encourages and rewards getting more powerful, while punishes people for failure. It's a positive feedback loop per-person, while being a net drain on the system as a whole, since EXP is lost. It arguably functions as both on a systematic level, since there's a curve for the time it takes to recover EXP lost that punishes people for leveling... and then rewards them again.

If I read this correctly, you're suggesting that dragons benefit three ways from other non-dragon players dying? 1. Nondragons regain experience slower. 2. Nondragons have to recover more experience than dragons. 3. Nondragons have to put more time into gaining their experience back.

All true. That's why dragon is an achievement. But you're also not counting the facts that 1. It's harder to gain experience at the dragon level. It can take a dragon 10-20 denizens to gain .1%. Sure they do that a bit quicker, but the mobs are harder to kill. 2. Dragons may actually recover less experience than nondragons (as a whole) because unless you're an avid hunter you probably are okay with being 100 + your safe space to losing dragon rather than hunting beyond what you just lost.

Mishgul · March 2015

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

Lowering the Barriers to Group PvP

Comments