Introduce House Thuranni and direct, non-combat, PVP missions

[Robert4818]

House Thuranni is a split off faction of House P. They are, unlike the other houses, direct competitors.

If we were to intoduce House T into the game as an actual house, we could then introduce direct, non-combat, pvp into the game.

What do I mean by Direct, non-combat, pvp?

I mean that party's directly compete inside of a mission, but do so in ways that do not result in direct combat between the two parties.

This could be a race between two members of the opposing parties, while the other team members activate traps, release monsters, and other actions that indirectly stop the opposing team's runner.

The key though is that the conflict does not erupt into normal player fighting normal player, causing all sorts of balance issues that need to be tweaked because of it.

[Alrik_Fassbauer]

Hm, the only real problem I see there is getting enough people to form parties to compete against ...

I have no idea how much viable it actually is ...

[Robert4818]

Hm, the only real problem I see there is getting enough people to form parties to compete against ...

I have no idea how much viable it actually is ...

This will depend on how popular the activity is. One downside to this over "normal PVP" is that the concept generally requires a heavy amount of teamwork. A single person can't dominate like they can in combat PVP. This might turn people off.

On the upside, people could play without having to be "pvp specced" and could be decent at the competition without having to play the scenarios over and over again, just to build up that "PvP Skill" which might entice more people into it.

And of course, there's always the option of creating a scenario that simply requires people to form a party, jump in, and then that party is the competitors against themselves.

[Galeria]

I posted a team vs team concept as an alternative to player vs player a while back that was pretty much ignored and the few responses were negative.

I would love to see more team vs team (not killing each other but competing against real people instead of AI) in the game but it seems most players do not want.

[Havok.cry]

This is the way DDO should do PVP if it ever decides to develop it.

[Ungood]

So basically, you have a dungeon like Litany, where we all go in, fight/casually stroll our way to a "Division Point" whereupon, as opposed to the whole party picking one direction, each member of the party goes their own way, and the first person to finish the quest "Wins".

In Premise and idea sense, it has the potential to be quite fun, and enjoyable, but highly contingent upon the obstacles placed in-front of the players, so as to not make this a cake walk for a caster and a brutal fight for a melee to just keep up.

However, in premise and concept, I like the idea of a forced split up and a bit of a race against each other to win.

The question then at this point, is what would be a players motive to do this?

IE: what do the winners get? What do the Losers get?

[Robert4818]

So basically, you have a dungeon like Litany, where we all go in, fight/casually stroll our way to a "Division Point" whereupon, as opposed to the whole party picking one direction, each member of the party goes their own way, and the first person to finish the quest "Wins".

In Premise and idea sense, it has the potential to be quite fun, and enjoyable, but highly contingent upon the obstacles placed in-front of the players, so as to not make this a cake walk for a caster and a brutal fight for a melee to just keep up.

However, in premise and concept, I like the idea of a forced split up and a bit of a race against each other to win.

The question then at this point, is what would be a players motive to do this?

IE: what do the winners get? What do the Losers get?

Losers: Xp, Winners: More XP and purchase tokens (similar to Challenge rewards)

[Ungood]

Losers: Xp, Winners: More XP and purchase tokens (similar to Challenge rewards)

As long as loosing provides a sufficient amount of EXP to make even trying viable, I could see this as a fun alternative to the typical exp grind.

[Robert4818]

As long as loosing provides a sufficient amount of EXP to make even trying viable, I could see this as a fun alternative to the typical exp grind.

Torn between that. As much of it depends on the competition, there needs to be some checks and balances to prevent rotation farming.

(I.E. I let you win, then we go again and you let me win) as such a thing would make big problems.)

[qoolboxer]

Make it guild vs guild. Winning grants astral diamonds+gold+renown. Win/lose grants xp. I think to have two guilds collaborating to exploit, taking turns to win, is unlikely. Limit each character to one participation per day.

[Robert4818]

Make it guild vs guild. Winning grants astral diamonds+gold+renown. Win/lose grants xp. I think to have two guilds collaborating to exploit, taking turns to win, is unlikely. Limit each character to one participation per day.

Could work, but 1/day wouldn't. If the competition's actually fun. I'd like for people to run them multiple times. Perhaps only award top tier once?

[Diyon]

Torn between that. As much of it depends on the competition, there needs to be some checks and balances to prevent rotation farming.

(I.E. I let you win, then we go again and you let me win) as such a thing would make big problems.)

Simple, you don't get to pick your opponents. You form a party, enter it in, and the game randomly matches you with another party.

What would also be neat if something could be set up so you got to play as the monsters in a dungeon versus a party (I still think it would be cool if random devs/GMs randomly possessed monsters in a quest occasionally. "Oh **** Maj took over Horoth! New tactics!")

[Thrudh]

What would also be neat if something could be set up so you got to play as the monsters in a dungeon versus a party (I still think it would be cool if random devs/GMs randomly possessed monsters in a quest occasionally. "Oh **** Maj took over Horoth! New tactics!")

I played a text-based game back in the 90s that was like that...

You'd walk into a room to farm some exp and loot just like you had been doing all week. And there would some chieftan orc who was controlled by a DM, and who would start taunting you. I loved it everytime that happened, even if I got killed.

[Havok.cry]

Random matched teams would work

Rewards I like:
loser: XP (same as winner)
winner: Astral diamonds, XP

I don't like the idea of loot for winners, very simply because (in my eyes) it wastes the time of anyone who didn't win if loot is attached to the win. They should add a vendor for extra shinies you can spend your diamonds on that is not gear. (IE: personal cosmetics, various potions and elixers like the challenges have, maybe make some new stuff for it too, like airship scenery)

[Sidewaysgts86]

/signed hugely to non-combat based PVP situations.

my 02 cents on rewards/exp?

Theres a lot of ways to handle this. First situation is how do we stop team a from letting team b winning, then replaying so team b lets team a win?

Ive a number of ideas here- Firstly, randomize who you are competing against- This makes it a bit more difficult to find the other group again so you can just give them an easy win. Secondly- Who said it has to be team a vs team b? What about team A vs B vs C vs D? Even if team A and B have a deal, youve got C and D to compete with as well. Of course another variant I like comes to mind, Team A&B vs Team C&D. This way you can still choose some party members, but theres still some randomization to your party.

We've already got a foundation very similar to this in DDO with the Halloween Mabaar event- Only the teams youre randomly put with are working for a similar goal, not their own.

As for rewards/loot/experience- Theres again a number of ways to deal with this that seem fitting to me- and depend largely on what the teams actually do.

For example, I love the concept of a gauntlet style map with each team competing for a singular "big" reward. For simplicities sake the map could be shaped like a giant cross, with each team running to the center room- In this room is a single chest, first team to make it to this room is granted the right to loot it, and with it a healthy sum of exp.

Along the way teams would fight mobs, face challenges, take down bosses, and solve puzzles to make it to the end. I think along the way to the goal there should be "optionals" to complete- And the completion of an optional imposes some kind of penalty or road-block on the opposing team(s). Ie Team solves a puzzle that on finishing forces teams b, c, and d, to have a large group of mobs spawned at some key point along the way

The reward for the "Winning" team would in this instance obviously be the very nice chest in the middle of the map (and hopefully a good dose of experience points). HOWEVER the opposing teams *shouldnt* come out empty handed (albeit not nearly as burdened by rewards as the winning teams)- Giving everyone a reason to play, but still rewarding "winning". Rewards for everyone can come in numerous forms, for example bestowing some experience points/smaller chests to the teams that defeat the additional challenges beset upon them by the other teams.

I find myself growing fond of the barter-system, guaranteeing the loot we want in the end, just requiring us to slowly but surely acquire the required ingredients/currency/tokens/whateveryouwantocallthems. Id love to see this system used here as well. This reward system imo fits very well with this type of challenge, rewarding winning teams "more" whatevers for trade in than the runner-up teams, while still giving the runner-ups SOME items for trade in and thus not totally wasting their time.

[Ungood]

Personally, I do not think there is a way to stop people from doing rotation wins and losses while still making this pack even the least bit enticing.

If you do random teams or random players, or what have you, trying to fill those slots could quickly become an exercise in futility, and frustration.

So what if Static Groups do rotation wins, that is really no different then them sharing their loot with each other, which they currently do.

The people who want to run this for loot alone would, the people who want to compete to see who is better at zerging though a quest against their friends, could.

However, I suppose, equally so, you could just make it so that everyone gets the same exp and same chest, they each just need to take their own path (like The Titan Awakes) and each player faces their own mini-boss, and trash mobs, traps, and other obstacles, and winning is just a bit of fame bragging rights without any real "game" impact.

[Uska]

To much dev time for something like this better to just keep making PVE content that the majority will enjoy

[Robert4818]

To much dev time for something like this better to just keep making PVE content that the majority will enjoy

I think a Competition like this would be enjoyable for the majority of players.

Its not a direct combat thing, so if you don't like that sort of thing, you don't need to worry about it.

It IS pve for the most part. There may be some curve balls thrown in, caused by other human players, but in the end its still the same type of activity that's already being done in the game.

Its like Tetris and 2 player Tetris. In both games, you play tetris. But in 2 player tetris, your board gets harder if the other player makes a great move.

[Uska]

I think a Competition like this would be enjoyable for the majority of players.

Its not a direct combat thing, so if you don't like that sort of thing, you don't need to worry about it.

It IS pve for the most part. There may be some curve balls thrown in, caused by other human players, but in the end its still the same type of activity that's already being done in the game.

Its like Tetris and 2 player Tetris. In both games, you play tetris. But in 2 player tetris, your board gets harder if the other player makes a great move.

Still think it would take much more dev time then its worth as it doesnt sound fun to me. To much time to set up two groups takes long enough now to get one group and if you have to wait for a random group its even longer if not and you can chose other group its to exploitable.

[Sidewaysgts86]

Thats why you need to make it that to win, its still a bit of a challenge. Even IF the other team allows you to rush first to the main loot chest, youll still have to solve puzzles, fight through mobs, and take down bosses.It shouldnt be "easy" to get to the end even IF the other team isnt making it harder for you (although it shouldnt be impossible either).

Still think it would take much more dev time then its worth

What are you basing this on? How much dev time is too much dev time for it to be worth anything? What knowledge do you have of how long it takes the devs to develop and release content? Or are you simply stating this for the sake of stating this? Dont get me wrong, im genuinely curious about 2 things here: A) How long it does really take to release content and B) if/how you know what youre speaking about here.