Forums » Suggestions
on this point :
Also a ranking system might be a good idea. This rank would be tied to your account and not the player. This means that if you have several characters the rating is bound to them. If you switch sides and you score is 0 you still have the ranking. Just a basic idea. Ranks could go something like newbie -> trader -> all rounder -> combatant -> Homicidal Maniac. The pk's bk's could add to this, set a bot kill at something like 1 point and the player kills at 5 points. This way the harcore cappers ranking will go up way before the bot killing squads do.
a botter will surely attain easier the combattant rank then a capper because of the reason that you are able to shoot more bots in a certain timeframe then you are able to shoot players.
Besides, in accordance to that point of you, I would be a combatant, but I still wouldn't kill newbies or people that are peacefull regarding me.
Besides, there are people who roleplay, with this I mean, they have 1 Homicidal maniac, they have another trader and they have a combatant. So it's not because it is the same person that he is gonna act exactly the same.
Besides ,I liked asphy's idea better, I would be a rulefollowing aggressive person.
cheers
Also a ranking system might be a good idea. This rank would be tied to your account and not the player. This means that if you have several characters the rating is bound to them. If you switch sides and you score is 0 you still have the ranking. Just a basic idea. Ranks could go something like newbie -> trader -> all rounder -> combatant -> Homicidal Maniac. The pk's bk's could add to this, set a bot kill at something like 1 point and the player kills at 5 points. This way the harcore cappers ranking will go up way before the bot killing squads do.
a botter will surely attain easier the combattant rank then a capper because of the reason that you are able to shoot more bots in a certain timeframe then you are able to shoot players.
Besides, in accordance to that point of you, I would be a combatant, but I still wouldn't kill newbies or people that are peacefull regarding me.
Besides, there are people who roleplay, with this I mean, they have 1 Homicidal maniac, they have another trader and they have a combatant. So it's not because it is the same person that he is gonna act exactly the same.
Besides ,I liked asphy's idea better, I would be a rulefollowing aggressive person.
cheers
Ok, here we go for the ONLY thing i find rankings good for.
Newbie: -10 PKs
Newbieish: -5 PKs
Not a newbie anymore: 0 PKs
Fairly good: +1 PKs
good: +2 PKs
average: +3 PKs
Very good: +5 PKs
not very elite: +6 pks
almost elite: +8 pks
elite: +10 pks
etc.
left, rank
right, amount of PKs you get for killing em.
Oh oh and it should be like diablo II, oyu get there ear for killing them!
Newbie: -10 PKs
Newbieish: -5 PKs
Not a newbie anymore: 0 PKs
Fairly good: +1 PKs
good: +2 PKs
average: +3 PKs
Very good: +5 PKs
not very elite: +6 pks
almost elite: +8 pks
elite: +10 pks
etc.
left, rank
right, amount of PKs you get for killing em.
Oh oh and it should be like diablo II, oyu get there ear for killing them!
and how would you attain the rank?
but for the rest , I like it ;)
cheers
but for the rest , I like it ;)
cheers
Umm, bots will increase your rank until fairly good, but if the bot is a high leveler it will increase up to good, depending on bot level.
Nah, bots should count for 0, because once you have their strategies down, they're just Ion fodder.
Ok then, so logicaly in a reset everyone would be a n00b and no one could get beyond n00bness
but could there be elite bots ?
cheers
me thinks about the early bots (3.1), where they newbie bots ??
If so, then I would have been a super newbie, every time you kill one, PK -10 :D
cheers
me thinks about the early bots (3.1), where they newbie bots ??
If so, then I would have been a super newbie, every time you kill one, PK -10 :D
I like this idea. And the voting idea, although, it should be a little more the 4 votes to wipe a person. Because then some group might on the spur of whim decide "Hey everyone lets kick some dumb n00b off the team!!"
Those who dont learn from history are doomed to repeat..yada..yada. Reputation systems never really work in rpgs.
I am only going to scratch the surface here: I have a lot to say, but at the same time I just got back from vacation and my head hurts (insufficient shielding on my brain to prevent damage upon reentry into the real world). So, try to pretend that all of this makes sense. :-)
"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat..yada..yada. Reputation systems never really work in rpgs."
As a product manager, I find that many engineers use this same semi-flawed logic (which is why I often want to slap them*). Just because no one else has implemented a reputation system in an RPG that has worked, it does NOT mean that all reputation systems are doomed to fail. What it does mean is that you learn from those failures and build a reputation system that does work. Step back; don't parrot old systems but start from the beginning and think things through. It can work. (*ranting is not at anyone here or at guild... it is aimed at those crazy engineers who for some reason resist creativity and don't ever want to try to build anything new...)
So you're right, don't repeat mistakes, but you're wrong, we should still build a reputation system. Based on many past threads re: reputation, I think the devs have several good ideas to work from (not to mention their own ideas, which I'm sure they have plenty of). I think it can work.
BUT.. now that I've said all that; having a reputation system between teams and NPCs is one thing; having a reputation system among your own team (and allowing team PKs) requires a lot more thought. FF is generally not a good idea, though, and extending a reputation system to accommodate for FF probably isn't worth it for this reason:
Example. Player "Gold Ace" flies up to player "Gold n00b".
N00b: "This game is fun? How do I trade?"
Ace: "Like This!" ..unleashes an avalon into n00bs face and laughs hysterically.
Ace's reputation suffers! The gold police bots start hunting him down. Other gold players start hunting him, and eventually drive him into uncharted sectors to fend for himself. He can't buy any new ship outfits because his reputation has caused gold stations to refuse sale. This all works well in terms of RPG and gameplay.
Except for one thing: n00b thinks to himself "Wow, another lame MMORPG..." and ditches the trial download into the trash. Guild is out one subscription. Repeat this several hundred times (it WILL happen) and ta-da! No subscribers to pay bills, servers are taken offline, everyone loses out.
"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat..yada..yada. Reputation systems never really work in rpgs."
As a product manager, I find that many engineers use this same semi-flawed logic (which is why I often want to slap them*). Just because no one else has implemented a reputation system in an RPG that has worked, it does NOT mean that all reputation systems are doomed to fail. What it does mean is that you learn from those failures and build a reputation system that does work. Step back; don't parrot old systems but start from the beginning and think things through. It can work. (*ranting is not at anyone here or at guild... it is aimed at those crazy engineers who for some reason resist creativity and don't ever want to try to build anything new...)
So you're right, don't repeat mistakes, but you're wrong, we should still build a reputation system. Based on many past threads re: reputation, I think the devs have several good ideas to work from (not to mention their own ideas, which I'm sure they have plenty of). I think it can work.
BUT.. now that I've said all that; having a reputation system between teams and NPCs is one thing; having a reputation system among your own team (and allowing team PKs) requires a lot more thought. FF is generally not a good idea, though, and extending a reputation system to accommodate for FF probably isn't worth it for this reason:
Example. Player "Gold Ace" flies up to player "Gold n00b".
N00b: "This game is fun? How do I trade?"
Ace: "Like This!" ..unleashes an avalon into n00bs face and laughs hysterically.
Ace's reputation suffers! The gold police bots start hunting him down. Other gold players start hunting him, and eventually drive him into uncharted sectors to fend for himself. He can't buy any new ship outfits because his reputation has caused gold stations to refuse sale. This all works well in terms of RPG and gameplay.
Except for one thing: n00b thinks to himself "Wow, another lame MMORPG..." and ditches the trial download into the trash. Guild is out one subscription. Repeat this several hundred times (it WILL happen) and ta-da! No subscribers to pay bills, servers are taken offline, everyone loses out.
slappyknappy your logic is sound. Any kind of friendly fire off soloution is a bad thing, however. I really feel that unprovoked kills should add to a bad reputation, but what a bad rep does needs to be addressed and thought over carefully. Maybe have sectors 17, 11, 7 be "pirate havens" - anyone can dock. The others could be well guarded with plasma guns that actually work. These guns would target people with a bad rep.
The stations should have kamikaze drones... Essentially an avalon with an engine attached... A very FAST engine... >:D
Here's another situation (sorry for the use of a specific nick, but I want everyone to understand)
Icarus destroyed Red Ace 1.
<Icarus> Thanks for the cargo... sucka!
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
<Red Ace 1> Laugh it up Icarus.
Should Red Ace 1's reputation suffer because he retaliated? Or what about this situation:
<Icarus> Run Red Ace, I'm gonna getcha
<Red Ace 1> No you aren't
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
What now? All he did was defend himself...
PS: One addition- if a player has a negative reputation below a threshold, FF pk's against him should not hurt the reputation of the killer.
Icarus destroyed Red Ace 1.
<Icarus> Thanks for the cargo... sucka!
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
<Red Ace 1> Laugh it up Icarus.
Should Red Ace 1's reputation suffer because he retaliated? Or what about this situation:
<Icarus> Run Red Ace, I'm gonna getcha
<Red Ace 1> No you aren't
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
What now? All he did was defend himself...
PS: One addition- if a player has a negative reputation below a threshold, FF pk's against him should not hurt the reputation of the killer.
"Here's another situation (sorry for the use of a specific nick, but I want everyone to understand)
Icarus destroyed Red Ace 1.
<Icarus> Thanks for the cargo... sucka!
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
<Red Ace 1> Laugh it up Icarus.
Should Red Ace 1's reputation suffer because he retaliated? Or what about this situation:
<Icarus> Run Red Ace, I'm gonna getcha
<Red Ace 1> No you aren't
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
What now? All he did was defend himself..."
Well, in situation 1-
Icarus- -1pt for killing member
Red Ace- -1pt for killing member, +1pt for killing pirate=0pt
In situation 2, i have no idea how that would be solved unless Icarus already had negitive points making him a pirate therefore
Red Ace- -1pt for killing member, +1pt for killing pirate=0pt
This system would work by giving + points to people for killing negitive point people (people who had commited crimes agianst the nation)
I gues it could work, on every kill after the pirates first.
Icarus destroyed Red Ace 1.
<Icarus> Thanks for the cargo... sucka!
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
<Red Ace 1> Laugh it up Icarus.
Should Red Ace 1's reputation suffer because he retaliated? Or what about this situation:
<Icarus> Run Red Ace, I'm gonna getcha
<Red Ace 1> No you aren't
Red Ace 1 destroyed Icarus.
What now? All he did was defend himself..."
Well, in situation 1-
Icarus- -1pt for killing member
Red Ace- -1pt for killing member, +1pt for killing pirate=0pt
In situation 2, i have no idea how that would be solved unless Icarus already had negitive points making him a pirate therefore
Red Ace- -1pt for killing member, +1pt for killing pirate=0pt
This system would work by giving + points to people for killing negitive point people (people who had commited crimes agianst the nation)
I gues it could work, on every kill after the pirates first.