The need to vacate wasn't truly necessary either - you could always go to town.
Doesn't matter, you're still being forced to do something you don't want to, just because someone is feeling dickish.
You're right it doesn't - I've said it before and I'll say it again... I was looking for a comprimise that would allow for world PvP for those that wanted it - but clearly you have less interested in reading into the spirit of the post and more interested in shutting down any idea of the concept.
Now that I think about it - D2 told enemies where you were - D3 wouldn't necessarily have to do that so an individual may never even know what act you're in (let alone what zone).
D3 also tells other people where you are (the banners in town).
I forgot it's impossible to reprogram something like that so that it's not visible to enemies.
As to your second comment, I feel like you're reading everything entirely too literally. My point is - if you feel like fighting someone I don't think you should have to leave the game and join an arena just to do that. You've completely failed to mention my alternative solution: a simple dueling system. Any critique there?
Oh, is that right? How about you actually read people's posts in previous pages, instead of just posting and not reading? Just from browsing the first couple of pages this thread (I've posted in other, similar threads), I found this:
Bilateral hostility - yes, IF there was a way to prevent the spamming of invites. After all, it's fun to MF with your mate for an hour and then challenge him to a quick duel, to test out the gear yo both found.
Unilateral hostility - definitely not. Only griefers want this.
So, you know....read what other people write.
I like the bilateral hostility concept, and you're right - I didn't read that previously... mostly because I was busy trying to explain what I thought was obvious in my original post (that it was JUST AN IDEA) from some clown that only wanted to mock the idea instead of providing any feedback. The standard /laugh mentality is not remotely useful when developing a concept.
From what your bilateral hostility statement indicates, you and I completely agree that at least a dueling system (provided a spamming avoidance mechanic is in place) is a good way to provide world pvp functionality.
All this comes down to one thing, the only thing I ever even cared about:
Would you (or anyone else reading this) agree that some sort of world pvp (if only a dueling system) should be present as an alternative to strictly joining arenas?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
I never said it was a final solution... it was an idea. Something people on a forum could take and modify, correct, or who knows - maybe devise alternative solutions to.
The need to vacate wasn't truly necessary either - you could always go to town.
Now that I think about it - D2 told enemies where you were - D3 wouldn't necessarily have to do that so an individual may never even know what act you're in (let alone what zone).
As to your second comment, I feel like you're reading everything entirely too literally. My point is - if you feel like fighting someone I don't think you should have to leave the game and join an arena just to do that. You've completely failed to mention my alternative solution: a simple dueling system. Any critique there?
"Or, what, you think that if you beat someone in world PvP he's going to magically stop being a dick?"
When many of the "dicks" that are trying to grief you are preteen boys - yes. If you outgear/outskill them and you demonstrate that by smashing their hopes of your own demise by killing them they tend to dissapear.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
In any case the idea is: Someone could come in, declare hostility, and effectively not hunt you down in seconds... they'd have to wait. This gives anyone not interested in a fight several minutes to finish up what they're doing (or get to a checkpoint) and then vacate the game.
lol you're funny.
In all seriousness...do I really have to say anything?
It's totally better to complain, mock, and ridicule a concept than to offer up any sort of solution. I don't know what I was thinking...
As it stands now, it feels like if you come across an individual in-game that you would like to "put in their place" you'll have to effectively request to meet them by the flagpole at 3:00 (ask them to join an arena vs you). That totally works because we all know that fighting and conflict are never spontaneous in nature and rarely do these sort of things happen without first the agreement to meet in battle on fair terms.
The fact that the griefer or non consensual PVPer is gimped or reduced in effectiveness is not relevant. The problem is non consensual PVP. Players being forced to engage in PVP when they want no part of it. Any solution that involves the possibility that a player might get involved in non consensual PVP is not going to fly.
You want an open world pvp system? Only if it doesn't cause non consensual PVP. The most feasible suggestion so far involves separating open pvp games and non open pvp games but this is both limited by resources and the small player base which will make matchmaking waits very long.
This is what I'd call good feedback. It brings up valid points. Anyone who bothered to read the entire thread or even just from my first post would know I was never trying to impliment my proposed system in the first place so much as introduce another concept...
It's very true that "Rules of Engagement" would do nothing to address:
*Game balance in a 4 person game where 2-3 of the individuals are PvP and the remaining individual(s) is/are stuck trying to handle the PvM alone.
*Games where no on in the game wants any sort of PvP.
Just like a "game type" (PvP allowed vs not allowed) system would do nothing to address:
When it comes right down to it, I played Diablo for years; I played D2 for even longer and in neither game did griefing become the apparent plague on my gametime that it did for some of you. I am sorry that you were either pursued to the degree that the game became no longer enjoyable for you (or worse that you were just completely inept at defending yourself/selves) but I still don't think that warrents a game design where world PvP is a complete non-option.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
"Rules of Engagement" - Any player to declare hostility against other players has a temporary debuff applied. Perhaps it starts as a -25% reduction to all stats @ 10 minutes sort of thing. For each minute that passes 2.5% of that debuff is retracted until the buff diminishes entirely... so:
Hostility can still only be declared from town and you can only hostile someone within X (5+/-) levels of your character... as always, hostiling someone puts you against anyone in their party as well.
That seems like a fun idea to mess around with....
This still allows griefing, which will create a the same situation that Diablo 2 had where people just stopped making public games, essentially causing the split between PvM and PvP Diablo players that we see today. Not having hostility and focusing PvP on Arenas has actually had a good amount of us PvM players interesting in PvP for Diablo 3. It'll be something we can choose to do, we won't be forced to.
The second issue this solution doesn't deal with is that the PvM game is tuned for having all players participate in progressing. If two leave mid-game to go duel, it essentially griefs the other two players by not allowing them to continue progressing. This again would create a situation where the PvP players is stepping on the desires of the PvM players.
I'm proposed an alternative solution that allows for these kind of duels, but keeps them part of Arena...private PvP Arena games. Essentially you'd create a private PvP game, choose the Arena type and invite players yourself. This would let you have unbalanced teams, spectators, etc. To go along with this idea, I support a FFA Arena type. Combined, a private FFA Arena match would essentially let the players make up the rules completely. Private PvP matches would not count towards your public matchmaking and as such could be used to practice as well. Seems like a good way to get the dueling and control that many PvP players want, without stepping on the PvM players.
I don't see how it fully allows griefing - it's hard to grief anyone in your level range when you've effectively been gimped for several minutes at least. It could actually result in a would-be griefer getting his faced stuffed by his intended victim(s). The percentage could always be adjusted to start at a greater value and retract at a different rate...
In any case the idea is: Someone could come in, declare hostility, and effectively not hunt you down in seconds... they'd have to wait. This gives anyone not interested in a fight several minutes to finish up what they're doing (or get to a checkpoint) and then vacate the game.
You're definetely right when you say that it doesn't address how to handle PvM when 2 (or greater) of the individuals in a 4 person game aren't assisting everyone else. That's another issue altogether - I was just throwing an idea out there on a way to bring back the "world pvp" that some people clearly desire. Not everyone wants a structured pvp system.
I already said it doesn't much matter to me either way. I'll be playing both PvM and PvP - I can't say that I'll miss the old hostility system, but I can't say that I think a complete lack of in-game PvP was a great move either...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
"Rules of Engagement" - Any player to declare hostility against other players has a temporary debuff applied. Perhaps it starts as a -25% reduction to all stats @ 10 minutes sort of thing. For each minute that passes 2.5% of that debuff is retracted until the buff diminishes entirely... so:
Hostility can still only be declared from town and you can only hostile someone within X (5+/-) levels of your character... as always, hostiling someone puts you against anyone in their party as well.
That seems like a fun idea to mess around with....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
I was (and still am) dissapointed about the complete lack of world PvP in D3. I'm sure I'll be all over arenas whenever I'm not farming Inferno later on, but I really wish there was some system in place to have a "less formal" PvP solution.
It really did add a sense of excitement to the game when someone came in and hostiled the group.
There certainly needed to be improvements on the D2 system but complete removal might have been too harsh a reaction...
Perhaps you can offer some suggestions as to how they could make the system better, in a way that would benefit the overall community and justify the development resources to implement? Hostility was a negative feature of Diablo 2 other then the fact that it was the only way you could PvP. It created a rift in the community as many people stopped making non-passworded games because of griefing. I don't see how it would fit well at all with the way Diablo 3 is designed, and have explained why... However, if you can give some insight into how it might be implemented in a way that would work with the game's design and benefit the community, I'd love to hear it.
Well, as some suggested - even just a dueling system (I hate to draw this parallel but - just like in WoW) could be at least 1 way to bring back some sort of informal PvP system...
As to how to address something more similar to the hostility system used in D2 - I'm not really sure. I think you're right when you say that it doesn't really fit into the game design and I agree that ultimately it was a bad system in its previous iteration. Shoot, I suppose you could always slap a timer on it.
Countdown to distruction - 10 minutes before this game goes ape-shit.
I haven't really put a ton of thought into how to make it work since it doesn't kill the game for me one way or the other...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
I was (and still am) dissapointed about the complete lack of world PvP in D3. I'm sure I'll be all over arenas whenever I'm not farming Inferno later on, but I really wish there was some system in place to have a "less formal" PvP solution.
It really did add a sense of excitement to the game when someone came in and hostiled the group.
There certainly needed to be improvements on the D2 system but complete removal might have been too harsh a reaction...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Liquid Cooled Intel I7 2700k OC'd to 5.0ghz at a max pull of 1.44v ~ 19-21C Idle ~ 68C max under load.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You're right it doesn't - I've said it before and I'll say it again... I was looking for a comprimise that would allow for world PvP for those that wanted it - but clearly you have less interested in reading into the spirit of the post and more interested in shutting down any idea of the concept.
I forgot it's impossible to reprogram something like that so that it's not visible to enemies.
I like the bilateral hostility concept, and you're right - I didn't read that previously... mostly because I was busy trying to explain what I thought was obvious in my original post (that it was JUST AN IDEA) from some clown that only wanted to mock the idea instead of providing any feedback. The standard /laugh mentality is not remotely useful when developing a concept.
From what your bilateral hostility statement indicates, you and I completely agree that at least a dueling system (provided a spamming avoidance mechanic is in place) is a good way to provide world pvp functionality.
All this comes down to one thing, the only thing I ever even cared about:
Would you (or anyone else reading this) agree that some sort of world pvp (if only a dueling system) should be present as an alternative to strictly joining arenas?
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
The need to vacate wasn't truly necessary either - you could always go to town.
Now that I think about it - D2 told enemies where you were - D3 wouldn't necessarily have to do that so an individual may never even know what act you're in (let alone what zone).
As to your second comment, I feel like you're reading everything entirely too literally. My point is - if you feel like fighting someone I don't think you should have to leave the game and join an arena just to do that. You've completely failed to mention my alternative solution: a simple dueling system. Any critique there?
"Or, what, you think that if you beat someone in world PvP he's going to magically stop being a dick?"
When many of the "dicks" that are trying to grief you are preteen boys - yes. If you outgear/outskill them and you demonstrate that by smashing their hopes of your own demise by killing them they tend to dissapear.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
It's totally better to complain, mock, and ridicule a concept than to offer up any sort of solution. I don't know what I was thinking...
As it stands now, it feels like if you come across an individual in-game that you would like to "put in their place" you'll have to effectively request to meet them by the flagpole at 3:00 (ask them to join an arena vs you). That totally works because we all know that fighting and conflict are never spontaneous in nature and rarely do these sort of things happen without first the agreement to meet in battle on fair terms.
This is what I'd call good feedback. It brings up valid points. Anyone who bothered to read the entire thread or even just from my first post would know I was never trying to impliment my proposed system in the first place so much as introduce another concept...
It's very true that "Rules of Engagement" would do nothing to address:
*Game balance in a 4 person game where 2-3 of the individuals are PvP and the remaining individual(s) is/are stuck trying to handle the PvM alone.
*Games where no on in the game wants any sort of PvP.
Just like a "game type" (PvP allowed vs not allowed) system would do nothing to address:
*Matchmaking issues - particularly increased wait times.
When it comes right down to it, I played Diablo for years; I played D2 for even longer and in neither game did griefing become the apparent plague on my gametime that it did for some of you. I am sorry that you were either pursued to the degree that the game became no longer enjoyable for you (or worse that you were just completely inept at defending yourself/selves) but I still don't think that warrents a game design where world PvP is a complete non-option.
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
I don't see how it fully allows griefing - it's hard to grief anyone in your level range when you've effectively been gimped for several minutes at least. It could actually result in a would-be griefer getting his faced stuffed by his intended victim(s). The percentage could always be adjusted to start at a greater value and retract at a different rate...
In any case the idea is: Someone could come in, declare hostility, and effectively not hunt you down in seconds... they'd have to wait. This gives anyone not interested in a fight several minutes to finish up what they're doing (or get to a checkpoint) and then vacate the game.
You're definetely right when you say that it doesn't address how to handle PvM when 2 (or greater) of the individuals in a 4 person game aren't assisting everyone else. That's another issue altogether - I was just throwing an idea out there on a way to bring back the "world pvp" that some people clearly desire. Not everyone wants a structured pvp system.
I already said it doesn't much matter to me either way. I'll be playing both PvM and PvP - I can't say that I'll miss the old hostility system, but I can't say that I think a complete lack of in-game PvP was a great move either...
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
"Rules of Engagement" - Any player to declare hostility against other players has a temporary debuff applied. Perhaps it starts as a -25% reduction to all stats @ 10 minutes sort of thing. For each minute that passes 2.5% of that debuff is retracted until the buff diminishes entirely... so:
-25% @ 10 minutes
-22.5% @ 9 minutes
-20% @ 8 minutes
... and so on....
Hostility can still only be declared from town and you can only hostile someone within X (5+/-) levels of your character... as always, hostiling someone puts you against anyone in their party as well.
That seems like a fun idea to mess around with....
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
Well, as some suggested - even just a dueling system (I hate to draw this parallel but - just like in WoW) could be at least 1 way to bring back some sort of informal PvP system...
As to how to address something more similar to the hostility system used in D2 - I'm not really sure. I think you're right when you say that it doesn't really fit into the game design and I agree that ultimately it was a bad system in its previous iteration. Shoot, I suppose you could always slap a timer on it.
Countdown to distruction - 10 minutes before this game goes ape-shit.
I haven't really put a ton of thought into how to make it work since it doesn't kill the game for me one way or the other...
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe
It really did add a sense of excitement to the game when someone came in and hostiled the group.
There certainly needed to be improvements on the D2 system but complete removal might have been too harsh a reaction...
16GB G Skill Ram ~ 2x Mushkin 120GB SSD's ~ MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozer ~ Asus P8P67 Deluxe