|
Post by Redacted on Oct 31, 2014 17:12:38 GMT -5
Unfortunately doing it per day would penalize casual players, but if you didn't mind that, you could always do it that way.
Not penalizing or hindering casual players codewise (as current RPI muds do, heavily) was a huge consideration into why I was trying to create something that didn't have a play constantly or be fucked outcome to skills.
|
|
|
Post by Redacted on Oct 31, 2014 17:32:33 GMT -5
Griefers will exploit anything to grief a game, but they should be dealt with on a case by case basis. I mean sure, you want to make it as griefer proof and unexploitable as possible, but that is kind of outside the scope of what I was thinking of because making anything griefer-proof is next to impossible. They just build better griefers. But that has nothing to do with a skill-gain system. Same with the concept of character investment. I'm not sure where character investment comes into play when deciding how to dole out skill points, as it is a wholly arbitrary value. There is no way to measure that sort of thing, so while it's an important thing to reward, it should be rewarded with other game mechanisms, just not skill gain.
And also the whole removing the grind aspect of skill gaining. That is a huge huge deal for me. I'd rather be having fun and adventuring or even social rping with my character, doing things I need to do because I need to do them, not grinding shit out because I want a skill up or because I feel like I need it just to participate in play.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Oct 31, 2014 18:40:31 GMT -5
Unfortunately doing it per day would penalize casual players, but if you didn't mind that, you could always do it that way. Conversely you dont want to penalize regular players by rewarding casual players for less work Griefers will exploit anything to grief a game, but they should be dealt with on a case by case basis. I mean sure, you want to make it as griefer proof and unexploitable as possible, but that is kind of outside the scope of what I was thinking of because making anything griefer-proof is next to impossible. They just build better griefers. But that has nothing to do with a skill-gain system. the skill system you proposed would allow people, with minimal effort, to create dangerous characters. Thats specifically what it has to do with your proposed skill-gain system. It's not a matter of making something griefer-proof, it's a mattr of warning you that if you use your system you will be welcoming abuse of it. Same with the concept of character investment. I'm not sure where character investment comes into play when deciding how to dole out skill points, as it is a wholly arbitrary value. There is no way to measure that sort of thing, so while it's an important thing to reward, it should be rewarded with other game mechanisms, just not skill gain. if you're referring to what i was proposing, I think we're not on the same page. The system would automatically reward people for not having been flagged with problems. one of the major problems with Arm is it doesn't matter if you're a great player; if a staffer isn't paying attention or otherwise doesnt give you a point for it, you're stuck. i'm taking the opposite approach: you are slowly rewarded until something comes up to punish you for. And also the whole removing the grind aspect of skill gaining. That is a huge huge deal for me. I'd rather be having fun and adventuring or even social rping with my character, doing things I need to do because I need to do them, not grinding shit out because I want a skill up or because I feel like I need it just to participate in play. There are actually two issues at play here. the first is discouraging grinding. I think thats best done though capping how much you can learn in a single time period and making that public. In my case I was thinking of limiting it per in-game day. the second issue is the one a lot of MUDs fall flat on: not basing every damned thng on active skill checks. There needs to be stuff you can accomplish by socialisng or exploring. Or tangible things to accomplish from role playing. Stuff that isnt necessarily easier just going off of skills. Or passive skills that go up when you're doin things you would probably would want to be doing anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Redacted on Oct 31, 2014 21:29:22 GMT -5
I think our concepts of how powerful a char should be out of the box don't match. With my vision, skills themselves aren't the end-all be all, and many of them may even be synergistic. I don't think I'd allow a new character to come in straight up powerful out of the box, just reasonably decent, in whatever direction they decided to sink skill points toward. I would likely not make it a straight up 'class' system though, like Arm and others do, but not altogether classless either. So I guess if someone wanted to make new chars uber powerful to start, that's their choice and game, but I wouldn't ever set up a system like that.
I just wouldn't use skill gain systems as a 'reward' for good roleplay either. I'd just use it as a manifestation of the character's abilities as they progress, full stop.
Things that allow a character to be played as envisioned and as fits in a game shouldn't be a reward or a punishment. I guess maybe we're looking at the utility of a skill system differently.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Oct 31, 2014 22:49:18 GMT -5
no, i don't think you're understanding what I am saying. Instead of a karma system, i was thinking of going with a system where you accumulate skill points to use for your next character based on 1) not misbehaving, 2) time played, and 3 skill level achieved. The idea is to reduce (or occasionally eliminate) effort needed to get a new character as far along as a previous character. It's a passive system to reduce the "Fuck it i quit" factor of getting really far in a game with permadeath. And to not turn away from a new role out of the dread of grinding. That doesnt mean there's no cap on how many points you can spend per new character. it's just something to ease the pain of starting over, that pays off bettr if youre not spotted playing like shit. It's not a reward for good RP, it accumlates automatically and is removed as a punishment for bad rp, cheating, or whatever. Things that allow a character to be played as envisioned and as fits in a game shouldn't be a reward or a punishment. I guess maybe we're looking at the utility of a skill system differently. i'm unclear on how anything I said would prevent someone from playing a character as envisioned. At most all Id do is give someone an occasional head start on achieving it.
|
|
|
Post by Redacted on Oct 31, 2014 23:09:09 GMT -5
I was referring to this. And there's definitely a disconnect but I'm not sure where. I'm saying that new players would have to work up to levels to actually be 'dangerous' to other characters, but they would simply be able to invest points at chargen to get them to at decent/reasonable levels. So if you invested points into combat skills, you actually could engage in combat without dying right away and even do decently at it. No, you would most likely not be at the level of a person who has played longer than you all other factors being equal, simply because they would have had more skill gains than you. But that's a feature of most skill systems in roleplaying games: you advance your skills one way or another during play. It's just that there would be absolutely no reason to skill grind because the person who plays 8 hrs a day will not be significantly greater skillwise than the person who plays 2 hours a day. Meaning that the character's skills are not gimped by their player's available play time. I mean sure, it would be great if everyone could play a game for 6+ hours a day, and for the people who can, -awesome-. But realistically speaking, most people don't have that much time to invest in a game, and currently nearly every single RPI (including those that give roleplay experience for the amount of roleplaying you do) reward or penalize for just that. Skills, in my opinion, should purely be a reflection of the character and how you've chosen to play them. As an example, using the play to gain system like arm has, it doesn't matter how awesome I roleplay my assassin, if I only have a couple hours a day to divide between roleplaying and sparring, even if I use them to spar wisely, I will NEVER be at a codedly similar level to someone who plays 8 hours a day. All investment and enjoyment should be rewarded, not just the people who have free time-- not when it comes to game mechanics and coding that influences the game on an advancement level. Also, I'm still not seeing the abuse potential, unless you're talking about some newly minted warrior type running around killing non-combatants, and I would venture to say that's an issue in most games that have non-combatants, and the solution to that sort of abuse doesn't exist in skill gain code.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Oct 31, 2014 23:47:34 GMT -5
Going by your last post we appear to be having two separate conversations that are being mixed together. so i'll be brief to try and narrow one of the convos down. we can focus on the other conversation after we wrap this one up so we dont just keep confusing each other. Also, I'm still not seeing the abuse potential, unless you're talking about some newly minted warrior type running around killing non-combatants, and I would venture to say that's an issue in most games that have non-combatants, and the solution to that sort of abuse doesn't exist in skill gain code. No, i was talking about a flaw in the skill gain formula you originally proposed. to edit down to the important points... At the end of the week, when the next skill increase is due ... The time period between skill advancement would be a purely OOC construct based on OOC time, not time played. This means whether you play 1 hour a day, 4 hours every few days, or 8 hours every day, the skill gains are normalized-- as long as your character does one coded action that is contingent on their coded skills between skill gains, they will get to gain or advance in the skill so what it boils down to is you perform one action in the skills you want per week, youre on the same level as someone actually bothering to play. This setup, like i originally mentioned, would allow a griefer to spend 10 minutes a week (per character if using multis) manufacturing disposable suicide bombers.
|
|
|
Post by Redacted on Nov 1, 2014 0:17:46 GMT -5
Why would you tolerate said player? I mean that literally happens in nearly every game, including the ones that severely gimp you at the start. It's kind of what griefers do. And if they want to log in for 10 minutes a day to raise 1 single skill, they're still gimping themselves, because 1 skill is not going to let you be devestatingly dangerous. If they log in once a week for ten minutes solely to practice 1 skill, do this for I dunno, let's say half a real life year, conservatively, and then let loose after a year of 10 minute intervals by a massive grief fest somehow...
1. I would laugh my ass off because that's total dedication to griefing. 2. I would remove the character from play and contact the player, politely asking them to play in a manner consistent with rules/expectations and make my expectations clear, because I'm not the asshole in the equation. 3. If they did it again I'd ban them.
That kind of behavior isn't codesploitation, since it's intended consequence. Yes, if they only invested 10 minutes a day, they'd beef something up, at least, I'm assuming you mean combat-wise and grief that way too. And their skill gains would not outstrip anyone who played more so they'd have no significant advantage over other combatants. Except the 10 minutes a day guy who does nothing but practice one skill would also not have the resources or social influence to get anything to allow him to take advantage of that. So skills would only be one aspect to being successful or 'dangerous', codedly.
And sure, I realize that this sort of idea needs tweaks, but it still allows more flexibility in customization and advancement and works more intuitively. It also exists solely in my head, so, feel free to run with the parts you like and make it better or improve on it with other ideas attached to it. It's just what I came up with that would work in the game I would build if I could.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Nov 1, 2014 0:40:17 GMT -5
Why would you tolerate said player? thats rather irrelevant to my point the system is open to abuse. Obviously you punish someone you catch abusing a system. And if they want to log in for 10 minutes a day to raise 1 single skill, they're still gimping themselves, because 1 skill is not going to let you be devestatingly dangerous. i said "you perform one action in the skills you want per week" meaning one action per skill, not one action in one skill. Keep in mind the way you laid things out, the disposable character would be on par with people actually playing the game. Thats the problem. it actually comes up in the next quote so this is a good point to transition... And their skill gains would not outstrip anyone who played more so they'd have no significant advantage over other combatants. Except the 10 minutes a day guy who does nothing but practice one skill would also not have the resources or social influence to get anything to allow him to take advantage of that. So skills would only be one aspect to being successful or 'dangerous', codedly. If someone was only playing one account and wasnt conspiring with another player they would have a resource problem. If either or neither of those conditions are true, you have a problem. And sure, I realize that this sort of idea needs tweaks, but it still allows more flexibility in customization and advancement and works more intuitively. It also exists solely in my head, so, feel free to run with the parts you like and make it better or improve on it with other ideas attached to it. It's just what I came up with that would work in the game I would build if I could. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I mostly liked your suggestion and said as much originally. But i was literally highlighting an exploit (this convo) and a disadvantage (conversation 2) to help you tweak it.
|
|
|
Post by Redacted on Nov 1, 2014 1:04:41 GMT -5
Oh, I'm not building a game atm, so tweaks to address the issues you brought up would have to be tested out. Since just sitting down and thinking about it solely in terms of skill gain (and not abuseability, which to me needs to addressed within all of the realm of game design working together) I can't think of a solution. At least not one that doesn't satisfy your needs, which I guess would be different than mine.
But hey! If you come up with a specific list of requirements you'd want for your game, using a system similar, just list off some specific requirements! I'm super happy to help brainstorm. You might have already mentioned it earlier in the thread, I'd need to go back and reread, since I just wanted to throw up the idea that I had.
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Nov 1, 2014 5:23:49 GMT -5
And this is why a true contender to Arm has never been made.
|
|
copper
staff puppet account
Posts: 14
|
Post by copper on Nov 1, 2014 10:03:38 GMT -5
I'd like to see something that could compete with Arm for play. I'm a relatively new player, but see so much potential in the game that isn't realized and if something better were to come along, I'd probably abandon ship. I don't think anyone who wants to play a combat oriented character really complains about the grind. Its something I know I've come to accept in any game. If anything, if my character is in the same clan as someone else who I only see maybe once or twice a week, and we're on par, I'd definitely be a bit bitter. You'll get players who log on briefly for years, never really interacting until one day they're just ridiculously overpowered with no real effort. As in real life, anything worth having should take effort.
Though I was very young at the time, I played a game on AOL called Dragon's Gate. Their system was a simple one, with skills basically having levels. Just say from lvl 1-100. Every time you swung a sword, you'd gain a skill increase, so to progress from lvl 1 sword to level 2 sword, you'd need maybe 50 swings. For my next level it'd be twice that. Now, as I progressed, maybe I would need ten swings just to get 1 gain and so on. But progressively it became harder and harder, but no matter how much time I put in, I WAS advancing in skill. Even if I sat all day twinking out, it would still take a ridiculous amount of time. Something like that, added with a cap on how much to progress per game day would be ideal to discourage too much twinking I think. There could also be maybe a bonus to failing as most people learn more from their mistakes than doing things perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Nov 1, 2014 11:43:07 GMT -5
And this is why a true contender to Arm has never been made. Please elaborate. your input would be welcome. Oh, I'm not building a game atm, so tweaks to address the issues you brought up would have to be tested out. Since just sitting down and thinking about it solely in terms of skill gain (and not abuseability, which to me needs to addressed within all of the realm of game design working together) I can't think of a solution. At least not one that doesn't satisfy your needs, which I guess would be different than mine. Like I said, i mostly liked your ideas. i was planning on a semi-classless character build and a time-period based learning cap already so even the parts i disagreed with alerted me to problems my own decisions might lead to. I have a lot of stuff i havent shared because I mostly wanted to throw stuff out here that i know annoy a LOT of people. Experience/skills are right up at the top of that list. The next step down is economy. (i'm tossing the shoutbox in here so my reply isn't lost.)that comes back to the second conversation we were having. What i believe is the biggest problem with skill systems (and this ties to economy) is youre mostly rewarded for combat skills. Some games also add crafting. So youre either sparring a lot or crafting a lot, but in either case you're sitting around mostly not role playing. and when i say "role playing" I dont mean "talking around other players" i mean "BEING YOUR CHARACTER". What i've been wracking my brains on are passive skills (ones you'd automatically use and improve rather than manually invoke) and coming up with situations that wouldnt require staff intervention where players take on jobs where their reward is based solely on accomplishing the goal. the how would be unimportant. Because games codedly only reward people who like to fight and craft. there's jack shit for explorers - whose skillset basically amounts to support for combat. And don't get me started on socializers - i'm not one of them, but I definitely sympathize with the utter indifference they must feel from the code. Here's an example of what i mean... Assume staff are not directly involved in anything for this... Say youre playing a game where you're in a city. A stretch of the imagination, i know. There are external threats to the city, from other nations, bandits, megafauna, or whatever. Wouldn't it be nice if while you were exploring outside, for whatever reason, you automatically built up intelligence reports? And there were NPCs you could turn them over to (for some kinds of rewards)? And the same system these NPCs were part of could then 1) generate content about the state of things outside as well as 2) missions for other players (including you!) to deal with some of the shit you found? It wouldn't necessarily be combat related, either. If you found arable land, the NPC gov't might put it up for sale. if you spotted herbs, the information could get (with some virtual delay time) to an apothecary whod post a notice about needing people to gather them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2014 11:37:42 GMT -5
no, i don't think you're understanding what I am saying. Instead of a karma system, i was thinking of going with a system where you accumulate skill points to use for your next character based on 1) not misbehaving, 2) time played, and 3 skill level achieved. The idea is to reduce (or occasionally eliminate) effort needed to get a new character as far along as a previous character. It's a passive system to reduce the "Fuck it i quit" factor of getting really far in a game with permadeath. And to not turn away from a new role out of the dread of grinding. That doesnt mean there's no cap on how many points you can spend per new character. it's just something to ease the pain of starting over, that pays off bettr if youre not spotted playing like shit. It's not a reward for good RP, it accumlates automatically and is removed as a punishment for bad rp, cheating, or whatever. As annoying as I find the skill grind in arm, it avoids a huge problem with power creep. There are any number of games that I simply wont join after six months or a year, because there is almost no point being in a competitive environment where you can't catch up. Your proposed system would need to avoid this for your game to have longevity.
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Nov 2, 2014 16:49:09 GMT -5
Would you define what power creep means to you?
|
|