Balancing the Risks
Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department
-
Cogliostro
- Posts: 766
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: Balancing the Risks
I'd liketo bring the topic back to the very beginning.
Combat in Cantr has slowly gone extinct. One of the main reasons is that the combat mechanisms are all broken, a mix of instant hits + drags which offer players no real feeling of taking part in battle.
Combat is also a safe activity without any surprises, which makes it boring for all sides involved. When there is some small element of risk, it's mainly about who is going to be awake when. It isn't ever about the valour, courage, or even simply the equipment stats of the characters involved like it ought to be to make things fun.
Then we sit in the forum and wonder "Why has combat become extinct? Could it be that it's due to people having nothing to fight about?" No, dear friends, it isn't that - take it from me - if only there was a technical way to have fun battles in Cantr again, people like me would find a reason to butt the heads of whole civilizations very quickly. Just give us a chance, something to work with, some acknowledgement that we exist, and that you care about properly nurturing healthy conflict too for our shared Cantrian storylines.
Throw out the unfixable, stale combat rules that we have now and use any one of the proposals made over the years by the "conflict emphasis lobby" to create a simple new system, anything would be better than the total extinction of combat event that we're unfortunately getting now.
Combat in Cantr has slowly gone extinct. One of the main reasons is that the combat mechanisms are all broken, a mix of instant hits + drags which offer players no real feeling of taking part in battle.
Combat is also a safe activity without any surprises, which makes it boring for all sides involved. When there is some small element of risk, it's mainly about who is going to be awake when. It isn't ever about the valour, courage, or even simply the equipment stats of the characters involved like it ought to be to make things fun.
Then we sit in the forum and wonder "Why has combat become extinct? Could it be that it's due to people having nothing to fight about?" No, dear friends, it isn't that - take it from me - if only there was a technical way to have fun battles in Cantr again, people like me would find a reason to butt the heads of whole civilizations very quickly. Just give us a chance, something to work with, some acknowledgement that we exist, and that you care about properly nurturing healthy conflict too for our shared Cantrian storylines.
Throw out the unfixable, stale combat rules that we have now and use any one of the proposals made over the years by the "conflict emphasis lobby" to create a simple new system, anything would be better than the total extinction of combat event that we're unfortunately getting now.
-
Nalaris
- Posts: 943
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 3:08 am
Re: Balancing the Risks
You can tell Cogli is a Whig from that post. Stupid Whigs.
More seriously, we have no reason to believe that combat wouldn't happen more often if there weren't more reasons for it. I'm not gonna take it from you, why would I ever take it from you? You're not the entire population of Cantr. Fact is we don't know and can't know how many people would fight wars if there were resource shortages as opposed to if combat worked differently. And any suggestion that starts with "completely rewrite one of the game systems from scratch" is going to run into intense resistance from the dev team for reasons I hope I don't have to explain.
More seriously, we have no reason to believe that combat wouldn't happen more often if there weren't more reasons for it. I'm not gonna take it from you, why would I ever take it from you? You're not the entire population of Cantr. Fact is we don't know and can't know how many people would fight wars if there were resource shortages as opposed to if combat worked differently. And any suggestion that starts with "completely rewrite one of the game systems from scratch" is going to run into intense resistance from the dev team for reasons I hope I don't have to explain.
- viktor
- Posts: 938
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 8:36 pm
- Location: winnipeg, manitoba, canada
Re: Balancing the Risks
wars have not stopped for any reason other than, nobody has gotten around to starting one lately who is ready to start one
it has nothing per say to do with game mechanics, it has to do with, having a reason for battle, being prepaired (armed, teamed etc) to go and start $#!^. and basically that is all there is to it.
many times group who would if left unhindered for a couple months would stir up a war, but often get eradicated by some other group in their infancy.
it has nothing to do with lack of trying, nothing to do with too much resources or the general game mechanics.
it just has to happen, we go through dry spells like this periodically and a war breaks out and people complain about too much war lol
it has nothing per say to do with game mechanics, it has to do with, having a reason for battle, being prepaired (armed, teamed etc) to go and start $#!^. and basically that is all there is to it.
many times group who would if left unhindered for a couple months would stir up a war, but often get eradicated by some other group in their infancy.
it has nothing to do with lack of trying, nothing to do with too much resources or the general game mechanics.
it just has to happen, we go through dry spells like this periodically and a war breaks out and people complain about too much war lol
- Marian
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:16 am
Re: Balancing the Risks
Sorry to bump this but I've reregistered my account and have been browsing a bunch of old threads while I wait for it to get activated.
I left pretty abruptly over a year ago due to a family emergency, but at the time I remember it was an accepted thing that combat was going to be made project based just like everything else in the game. I thought it was a fantastic idea, what happened? I was really hoping I'd returned to find it had been implemented a long time ago.
(Was also kind of hoping I'd find out there'd been a terrible global earthquake followed by awe-inspiring but oddly selective tidal waves that somehow dumped every single uninhabited location straight into the ocean, but that might have been too much wishful thinking on my part....)
I left pretty abruptly over a year ago due to a family emergency, but at the time I remember it was an accepted thing that combat was going to be made project based just like everything else in the game. I thought it was a fantastic idea, what happened? I was really hoping I'd returned to find it had been implemented a long time ago.
(Was also kind of hoping I'd find out there'd been a terrible global earthquake followed by awe-inspiring but oddly selective tidal waves that somehow dumped every single uninhabited location straight into the ocean, but that might have been too much wishful thinking on my part....)
- Doug R.
- Posts: 14857
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:56 pm
- Contact:
Re: Balancing the Risks
We couldn't settle on a combat system that a clear majority of people liked and also didn't introduce a plethora of new problems. Combat death isn't instant anymore, and it was decided that that's about as close to a fix as we're going to get.
Hamsters is nice. ~Kaylee, Firefly
- Marian
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:16 am
Re: Balancing the Risks
That's too bad, I really liked the idea of being able to RP with the person that's attacking you.
I read about the Near Death State thing too and it has a lot of potential in certain situations and is definitely better than nothing, but to me the core issue has always been that most of the time the victim only sees their attacker for about two seconds a day. Three extra days to roleplay won't do much if there's nobody to roleplay with.
I read about the Near Death State thing too and it has a lot of potential in certain situations and is definitely better than nothing, but to me the core issue has always been that most of the time the victim only sees their attacker for about two seconds a day. Three extra days to roleplay won't do much if there's nobody to roleplay with.
- Henkie
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:36 pm
Re: Balancing the Risks
That responsibility lies with the attacker then, Marian... I'm hugely against the project-based fighting for one, so as it is now... Well it fices a few things and will definitely save town leaders and such from ruthless murderers... bring everyone into NDS, get the keys, get what you want, leave them alive... Easy peasy, everyone happy 
-
Voltenion
- Posts: 2286
- Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:52 am
- Location: "Portugalija" como dizem alguns filhos da mãe
- Contact:
Re: Balancing the Risks
Henkie wrote:That responsibility lies with the attacker then, Marian... I'm hugely against the project-based fighting for one, so as it is now... Well it fices a few things and will definitely save town leaders and such from ruthless murderers... bring everyone into NDS, get the keys, get what you want, leave them alive... Easy peasy, everyone happy
That's not a "ruthless murderer" then, just a violent thief. I don't think we should expect the NDS state to save our dearest characters from death. But what I love (or will love) NDS for is that it lets the attackers and victims roleplay the game after they have secured the victory. At least that's what I see the purpose of it. Deaths will still happen, but they will be an actual event that will surely please both the players. Unlike the ol' "drag-kill in empty room" that we've all come to know so well.
I know if I'm roleplaying a ruthless murderer I will not let his victims live just because I got their keys now.
"Delete Fu Island" activist.
- Henkie
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:36 pm
Re: Balancing the Risks
Indeed Voltenion, and thanks to NDS we can now make that difference in game and the 'hit and run' will hopefully replace the 'kill and run', opening many options for people to act differently and labeled differently (currently you're a killer or you're not, for example, we have a range in between now).
- Marian
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:16 am
Re: Balancing the Risks
Yes, it definitely makes a difference in how piracy works, or at least definitely could, depending on just how bloodthirsty the pirate is.
I still think project based combat combined with a way for people to work together to break down doors, like the old battering ram idea, would have opened up a lot more possibilities for actual wars though.
I still think project based combat combined with a way for people to work together to break down doors, like the old battering ram idea, would have opened up a lot more possibilities for actual wars though.
- Mr. Bones
- Posts: 600
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:48 pm
- Location: Alabama
Re: Balancing the Risks
NDS also makes it easier to arrest people instead of killing them. A person steals something and takes a road, only option in the past was the criminal would return or the criminal would be killed. Now you put them in NDS, they end up back in town, you return and lock them away instead. This would be a perfect thing to use against suicidal newspawns. Put them in a prison and force feed them until they beg PD to kill the character for them.
All that aside, I support the current combat system as it is and I'm glad there aren't going to be any drastic changes made.
All that aside, I support the current combat system as it is and I'm glad there aren't going to be any drastic changes made.
- Henkie
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:36 pm
Re: Balancing the Risks
I know it is frowned upon (+1 posts) but I merely wish to impress my support for Mr. Bones' comment 
Oh, and smack him a bit for giving PD even MORE work!
Oh, and smack him a bit for giving PD even MORE work!
- Marian
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:16 am
Re: Balancing the Risks
I thought the player with a NDS character could choose to let them die? So, no forcibly healing and feeding suicidal newspawns, sorry. 
Though I have lost a thief of my own because they immediately got spam-clicked to death while I was busy typing up an 'I surrender' post. Not all thieves are suicidal, even the newspawn ones, so it'd be helpful for that.
I also murdered a suspicious looking dude who I thought was a pirate one time but then felt really bad because I didn't have proof... >.>
Though I have lost a thief of my own because they immediately got spam-clicked to death while I was busy typing up an 'I surrender' post. Not all thieves are suicidal, even the newspawn ones, so it'd be helpful for that.
I also murdered a suspicious looking dude who I thought was a pirate one time but then felt really bad because I didn't have proof... >.>
- Mr. Bones
- Posts: 600
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:48 pm
- Location: Alabama
Re: Balancing the Risks
Marian wrote:I thought the player with a NDS character could choose to let them die? So, no forcibly healing and feeding suicidal newspawns, sorry.
There's a heal button you can use to revive the person in NDS. I'm not sure if they have an option to reject this or not.
Henkie wrote:I know it is frowned upon (+1 posts) but I merely wish to impress my support for Mr. Bones' comment
Oh, and smack him a bit for giving PD even MORE work!
You know we will all start doing it.
- Henkie
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:36 pm
Re: Balancing the Risks
Yeah, it's General Discussion anyway... Why not let it slip into general ignorance hm? 
Oeeeeh, if anyone can heal anyone a hyperactive clickfester can keep someone alive forever!!!
Oeeeeh, if anyone can heal anyone a hyperactive clickfester can keep someone alive forever!!!
Return to “General Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
