Forums » Suggestions
i like this idea. id like to be able to kill some high level player and maybe steal their ultra weapon, mind you no high level player will fightyou because the devs totally nerfed the game and made a silly xp penalty thing. but in a proper world, it would be possible :)
I agree with Soltis that having items which are limited to a certain # is probably a bad idea. I also agree that having items which are better than items which can ordinarily be bought in stations be randomly available (especially only randomly available) is probably a bad idea. I concur that it would probably lead to an elite few as the best pilots would gain rare items fastest and retain them longest. While I don't require that the game be absolutely fair, I don't think that this would add enough to gameplay to justify itself.
I wouldn't mind however certain rare items to be available as a result (or even possible result) of certain missions.
Suppose we have a weapon like:
Alien Death Ray - (S)
Damage: 620
Velocity: 220
Energy: 12
Cycle Interval: .2s
Range: 5s
Thats arguably better than any direct fire weapon in the game. We want to make this weapon a rare 'artifact' which will excite players when they first encounter it, but which doesn't unbalance the game. How might we go about doing this? I'd do it in two parts:
1) The weapon is available at any level as one of the potential results of a special 'Investigate the Derelict Spacecraft' mission. This mission is relatively rare, and the death ray isn't always dropped as loot, but anyone can get lucky and get a 'preview' of the weapon.
2) The weapon becomes available to members of several factions who have extremely high faction standing, and complete a special 'quest' - a series of dangerous missions (at least one of which should be so difficult that it can only be completed in a group). The back story for each faction can be a little different, for example, the Itani quest involves gaining membership in a special 'Men in Black' research organization, the Nuetral quest involves gaining membership in a bizarre religious cult that worships the aliens and awaits 'the return', and so forth. But the basic point is that you can thenseforth buy 'Alien Death Rays' in certain stations.
In this way, we both make the item exceptionally rare and special, and yet make it eventually available to almost everyone who plays long enough.
I wouldn't mind however certain rare items to be available as a result (or even possible result) of certain missions.
Suppose we have a weapon like:
Alien Death Ray - (S)
Damage: 620
Velocity: 220
Energy: 12
Cycle Interval: .2s
Range: 5s
Thats arguably better than any direct fire weapon in the game. We want to make this weapon a rare 'artifact' which will excite players when they first encounter it, but which doesn't unbalance the game. How might we go about doing this? I'd do it in two parts:
1) The weapon is available at any level as one of the potential results of a special 'Investigate the Derelict Spacecraft' mission. This mission is relatively rare, and the death ray isn't always dropped as loot, but anyone can get lucky and get a 'preview' of the weapon.
2) The weapon becomes available to members of several factions who have extremely high faction standing, and complete a special 'quest' - a series of dangerous missions (at least one of which should be so difficult that it can only be completed in a group). The back story for each faction can be a little different, for example, the Itani quest involves gaining membership in a special 'Men in Black' research organization, the Nuetral quest involves gaining membership in a bizarre religious cult that worships the aliens and awaits 'the return', and so forth. But the basic point is that you can thenseforth buy 'Alien Death Rays' in certain stations.
In this way, we both make the item exceptionally rare and special, and yet make it eventually available to almost everyone who plays long enough.
This idea is better than the others, Celebrim, but the problem is that then everyone has to go through those loops you described, voluntarily or not, just to get the weapon in question so they can be competitive.
We want this game to offer options, not force people to do one thing to get The Best Combo(tm).
We want this game to offer options, not force people to do one thing to get The Best Combo(tm).
"We want this game to offer options, not force people to do one thing to get The Best Combo(tm)."
And where did I suggest I wanted a one best combo? Did I ever suggest that this would be the only item in the game? Did I even suggest that this would be the only rare item in the game? Did I even state this item in such a manner that it was an enormous advantage over NB3's? Exactly why would you think that this one suggestion represents the full range of my thinking? All I was trying to show is a proof by counter example that rare items could be introduced in an interesting and not unbalancing fashion. If I can think of one counter example, I can almost certainly think of others.
If the game was set up the way I have suggested in the past, even a skilled pilot relying on Alien Death rays would have a serious problem against an ordinary opponent using reflective armor, a couple of adamantium armor plates, and some sort of combination of short range agile homing missiles and autocannons (for example).
If the game was set up the way I have suggested, noone would be forced to go through any particular hoop at all. There would be ways to get licences without money, ways to improve the quality of the freely available equipment, ways to get money without trading, ways to defend yourself without loads of combat licenses, etc. etc. If you don't want to trade, fine. If you don't want to kill dozens of mindless bots just to have access to decent equipment, then that's fine too.
And where did I suggest I wanted a one best combo? Did I ever suggest that this would be the only item in the game? Did I even suggest that this would be the only rare item in the game? Did I even state this item in such a manner that it was an enormous advantage over NB3's? Exactly why would you think that this one suggestion represents the full range of my thinking? All I was trying to show is a proof by counter example that rare items could be introduced in an interesting and not unbalancing fashion. If I can think of one counter example, I can almost certainly think of others.
If the game was set up the way I have suggested in the past, even a skilled pilot relying on Alien Death rays would have a serious problem against an ordinary opponent using reflective armor, a couple of adamantium armor plates, and some sort of combination of short range agile homing missiles and autocannons (for example).
If the game was set up the way I have suggested, noone would be forced to go through any particular hoop at all. There would be ways to get licences without money, ways to improve the quality of the freely available equipment, ways to get money without trading, ways to defend yourself without loads of combat licenses, etc. etc. If you don't want to trade, fine. If you don't want to kill dozens of mindless bots just to have access to decent equipment, then that's fine too.
Well, okay. Let's rephrase that:
If something too powerful of the nature you described was added, with the game remaining otherwise how it is, it would be a problem.
If countermeasures were available, it would help. However, while I like the idea of differing types of armor and weapons, I would like to avoid paper-rock-scissors battles... I'm interested to know what you've thought up to prevent that eventuality.
If something too powerful of the nature you described was added, with the game remaining otherwise how it is, it would be a problem.
If countermeasures were available, it would help. However, while I like the idea of differing types of armor and weapons, I would like to avoid paper-rock-scissors battles... I'm interested to know what you've thought up to prevent that eventuality.
Aren't paper rock scisors battles what we do want? To me that implies that no combo is ultimate. Everything has a counter to it and everything can counter something. Is there an alternative to this type of balance? I think you must mean specifically you want to avoid every weapon having a counter armor? You obviously aren't pushing for uber combos.
Also, lets keep in mind that rare items don't all have to be more powerfull than what is readily available. Having a unique item can be fun all on its own, it doesn't need to put your ship in GOD mode, it can just be a fun status symbol (fear my otherworld orange gravitons or whatever). It adds deapth and variety to the game just by being rare.
Also, lets keep in mind that rare items don't all have to be more powerfull than what is readily available. Having a unique item can be fun all on its own, it doesn't need to put your ship in GOD mode, it can just be a fun status symbol (fear my otherworld orange gravitons or whatever). It adds deapth and variety to the game just by being rare.
No, it's not at all what we want.
What we want is many different options, all of which can be used against the others, with the success of whomever is using it being dependent on their skill and how they use what they have.
We don't want "rockets beat lasers beat missiles beat rockets" or any variation thereof; what we want is a system where skill is the deciding factor, and different options are available to different playing styles.
What we want is many different options, all of which can be used against the others, with the success of whomever is using it being dependent on their skill and how they use what they have.
We don't want "rockets beat lasers beat missiles beat rockets" or any variation thereof; what we want is a system where skill is the deciding factor, and different options are available to different playing styles.
"If something too powerful of the nature you described was added, with the game remaining otherwise how it is, it would be a problem."
Err... maybe. But it would be no worse of a problem than the existing problem with NB3's.
"What we want is many different options, all of which can be used against the others, with the success of whomever is using it being dependent on their skill and how they use what they have."
I think what you want is impossible. 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' isn't just something you design for; its the automatic result of any reasonably complex balance. Either you have 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' or you have 'one best choice'. There isn't alot of alternative. 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' will naturally arise in any well designed system, or else there will be one thing that isn't weak against any tactic and that's what you should use. Designing a system in which no alternative is weak against any other alternative is probably impossible.
That isn't to say that we shouldn't have game primarily based on skill. What we want is a game in which the advantages of a particular strategy choice is only relative compared to the advantages of another strategy choice (and which equally will have disadvantages against another strategy choice). In other words, we don't want 'rockets > lasers > missiles > rockets' but something like 'rockets + ordinary skill > lasers + ordinary skill > missiles + ordinary skill > rockets + ordinary skill' but 'rockets + ordinary skill < lasers + high skill'. And, we'd like to make the advantage of skill far more important than incidental advantages in comparing tactics.
I think it really wierd that people seem to have no objection to buses and ion blasters coexisting with Valks and NB3's, but are offended by the suggestion that (for example) a guy with a long range weapon is going to have an natural advantage over a lightly armored opponent with short range weapons (first strike, remember), who in turn will probably have an advantage over a sluggish opponent with short range weapons (agility > hit points, remember), who in turn will probably have an advantage over the guy with long range weapons and so forth...
Err... maybe. But it would be no worse of a problem than the existing problem with NB3's.
"What we want is many different options, all of which can be used against the others, with the success of whomever is using it being dependent on their skill and how they use what they have."
I think what you want is impossible. 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' isn't just something you design for; its the automatic result of any reasonably complex balance. Either you have 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' or you have 'one best choice'. There isn't alot of alternative. 'Rock-Paper-Scissors' will naturally arise in any well designed system, or else there will be one thing that isn't weak against any tactic and that's what you should use. Designing a system in which no alternative is weak against any other alternative is probably impossible.
That isn't to say that we shouldn't have game primarily based on skill. What we want is a game in which the advantages of a particular strategy choice is only relative compared to the advantages of another strategy choice (and which equally will have disadvantages against another strategy choice). In other words, we don't want 'rockets > lasers > missiles > rockets' but something like 'rockets + ordinary skill > lasers + ordinary skill > missiles + ordinary skill > rockets + ordinary skill' but 'rockets + ordinary skill < lasers + high skill'. And, we'd like to make the advantage of skill far more important than incidental advantages in comparing tactics.
I think it really wierd that people seem to have no objection to buses and ion blasters coexisting with Valks and NB3's, but are offended by the suggestion that (for example) a guy with a long range weapon is going to have an natural advantage over a lightly armored opponent with short range weapons (first strike, remember), who in turn will probably have an advantage over a sluggish opponent with short range weapons (agility > hit points, remember), who in turn will probably have an advantage over the guy with long range weapons and so forth...
introduce a slew of new weapons, hide the weapon stats. Then proceed to giggle your ass off as everyone trys to figure it all out.
also, you could make so that as a player uses a weapon over time they could slowly discover the stats, say a player gets so many successful hits on bots/players he can now see the exact damage it does, so many more, he gets a the velocity, etc..etc...
YAY so ive edited this twice now, each time adding a new paragraph, I got to thinking about what i said and the nice thing about the weapon stats being hidden, is knowing them gives no real advantage after you have played with all the toys, and since players would be more apt to just choose what weapon they like and learn how to kill with it, instead of the biggest number syndrome, we would get a lot more skilled pilots.
also, you could make so that as a player uses a weapon over time they could slowly discover the stats, say a player gets so many successful hits on bots/players he can now see the exact damage it does, so many more, he gets a the velocity, etc..etc...
YAY so ive edited this twice now, each time adding a new paragraph, I got to thinking about what i said and the nice thing about the weapon stats being hidden, is knowing them gives no real advantage after you have played with all the toys, and since players would be more apt to just choose what weapon they like and learn how to kill with it, instead of the biggest number syndrome, we would get a lot more skilled pilots.
tramshed: In the age of the internet, no information stays hidden for long.
Given the unveiling of the design wiki, it seems like this is (somewhat) the direction the devs want to take the game. We had a good discussion going here so I'm going to go ahead and resurrect it.
i think that a good salvage system would be this:
every time you destroy anyone (bot or player) they drop a salvage crate. this replaces the scrap metal crate curently dropped by bots. The contents of the crate are determined semi randomly. They are limited by the slavage level of the player who recovers it and the type of ship that was carying it (probably mass based).
at worst the crate would contain scrap metal. at best it would contain a variety of widgets such as: targeting arrays, vismettal, etc. anything you may expect to finde in the wrekage of a ship.
As for quest items, i think they would make a good adition to the game. the added equipment doesn't have to be that much better than what is curently availabe. It could for example be identicle to it's closest parallel but be 3/4 the mass. or some similar increase that while noticable isn't overpowered. Additional quest items could be new color textures for your ships (say, a pure black, or a tie-die pattern, or perhaps a shiny silver). the idea is to give cool stuff that is worth the effort but has no signifigant unbalancing effect.
every time you destroy anyone (bot or player) they drop a salvage crate. this replaces the scrap metal crate curently dropped by bots. The contents of the crate are determined semi randomly. They are limited by the slavage level of the player who recovers it and the type of ship that was carying it (probably mass based).
at worst the crate would contain scrap metal. at best it would contain a variety of widgets such as: targeting arrays, vismettal, etc. anything you may expect to finde in the wrekage of a ship.
As for quest items, i think they would make a good adition to the game. the added equipment doesn't have to be that much better than what is curently availabe. It could for example be identicle to it's closest parallel but be 3/4 the mass. or some similar increase that while noticable isn't overpowered. Additional quest items could be new color textures for your ships (say, a pure black, or a tie-die pattern, or perhaps a shiny silver). the idea is to give cool stuff that is worth the effort but has no signifigant unbalancing effect.
gaining special items from missions seem to be what the devs had in mind before, so sounds good...
When the suggestion was made to allow players to "salvage" from the wreckage of their fallen foes, I wish to emphasize a possible exploit (which could be avoided by making the probability of salvaging an item low)--
Weapon transfer between players. If I were a level 1 n00b and had a high level buddy, he shouldn't be able to load up his ship, let me kill him a few times, and give me a chance of salvaging a decent weapon. (If he were to do that, let's make it very unworthwhile, although money isn't an issue for many players)
When the suggestion was made to allow players to "salvage" from the wreckage of their fallen foes, I wish to emphasize a possible exploit (which could be avoided by making the probability of salvaging an item low)--
Weapon transfer between players. If I were a level 1 n00b and had a high level buddy, he shouldn't be able to load up his ship, let me kill him a few times, and give me a chance of salvaging a decent weapon. (If he were to do that, let's make it very unworthwhile, although money isn't an issue for many players)
But, can't we just make the salvaged weapons usable to the n00b? A nice way is to /explode when he/she tries to fire it =).
"Salvage widgets are kinda like the box containing Schrodinger's cat." <-- Yea Holden, I bet you'd really like one of those salvaged widgets. and you'd never open it, but spend time philosophizing on the ramifications and interpretations of Schroedinger's cat.
I 'gree with Celebrim, just one litteeeelt thing, with a 'salvage skill' that helps finding rare stuff, but then a 'repair skill' so that you can tune it up to the max :)
I agree that this sounds like a great idea.
-1 4m 73h 7hr34d n3cr0m4nc3r. Ph33r m3.
-1 4m 73h 7hr34d n3cr0m4nc3r. Ph33r m3.
This is part of what I'm talking about when I say "decreasing the entropy of Vendetta"
Rare items. Things that take a long time or a lot of skill to find/craft and unique things (items/weapons) that not just any joe who's got a lot of time on his hands can get.
If I know there are a limited number of Gatling Turret MkII's out there, I'll want to spend time in game PKing other people so I can steal their unique items, and when I get PKed I'll spend time in game trying to get my items back.
Celebrim's post at the top of this page is an excellent example of how a rare item drop could potentially be implemented. Although I still firmly believe there ought to be a limited number in game for the reasons I enumerated on the first page:
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/7295#87760
Rare items. Things that take a long time or a lot of skill to find/craft and unique things (items/weapons) that not just any joe who's got a lot of time on his hands can get.
If I know there are a limited number of Gatling Turret MkII's out there, I'll want to spend time in game PKing other people so I can steal their unique items, and when I get PKed I'll spend time in game trying to get my items back.
Celebrim's post at the top of this page is an excellent example of how a rare item drop could potentially be implemented. Although I still firmly believe there ought to be a limited number in game for the reasons I enumerated on the first page:
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/7295#87760
....we want to DECREASE the entropy of the game?
I dunno, a game sans-entropy would get pretty boring...
I dunno, a game sans-entropy would get pretty boring...
entropy, n; the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity
from Merriam-Webster.com
A totally flat universe has a high state of entropy. We want unique items and locations so that the universe is less uniform
from Merriam-Webster.com
A totally flat universe has a high state of entropy. We want unique items and locations so that the universe is less uniform