Smuggler Archive

Okay, I've been thinking over a couple things and wanted to bounce these ideas off of the best community out there before I pitched them in thier proper forums, to see what you guys thought about them, to get some feedback and pump you for information, so that I have spectacular ideas which I could take full credit for later. Anyway, here they are.

City Warn

As you may or may not know, the command "/citywarn" usable by player city Militia members was removed because a bunch of idiots thought it'd be fun to grief a CSR. I think they should consolidate CityWarn's TEF into City Ban.

If a player gets banned from a player city, they have 90 seconds to leave the city before they gain a TEF and are attackable by anyone(there should be a warning that pops up on thier screen, letting them know that they have those 90 seconds to leave). Then make it so that if they reenter the city and they're still banned, that the TEF comes back. That way, the Militia can clear out the trash, and the player can't be griefed, as the player has to make the choice of staying in the town he just got banned in, or leaving so that he doesn't risk death. The bonus is that it can give role-players an "outlaw feel" to be in a city that they've been banned in.

Note: City Ban should still keep people from cloning, shuttling, using city facilities, and so on. This would be an added functionality.

Bounty Hunting Players

With the current incarnation which only allows hunting of Jedi(but hopefully hunting of Smugglers sometime in the future), it seems kinda silly that it can be 5 on 1. Would it not make more sense to have it a six-player free for all? What do I mean, exactly?

Make it so that if Tom and Dïck(isn't it ironic I can't use that word as an actual name?) both have a mission on Harry, that while both are capable of attacking Harry, they can also attack each other.

I got the idea when rewatching The Empire Strikes Back the other day, and saw the scene with Darth Vader and the Bounty Hunters. They weren't all cooperating to split the Bounty, they were competing against each other to get the Bounty. Well, to be fair, there was a pair who were cooperating, but it wasn't the entire group. Anyway, to me, this makes perfect sense. I could easily see multiple Bounty Hunters firing on thier mark and each other trying to be the one who comes out on top. The way you determine who gets the payout for the job is to see who made the deathblow. The player, or group(if hunters do want to cooperate) who made the deathblow gets the reward. The rest get shafted. This way, the only people participating in the combat are the Hunters with the mission, and whoever has the price on his head.


So, what do you guys think?

The first one doesn't really have anything to do with Smugglers. And it was removed because it was widely used to grief players and there were very few legitimate uses for it, since you can ban them from entering player structures and /addignore them if they're just talking crap.
Any system where player's can force other players into PvP should not be in the game. Particularly not one that encourages massive "gank squads".

Second one is again, nothing to do with Smugglers. It's a BH thing. Something that has been brought up there before, I might add.

---

Nicolas_Frost wrote:


With the current incarnation which only allows hunting of Jedi(but hopefully hunting of Smugglers sometime in the future), it seems kinda silly that it can be 5 on 1. Would it not make more sense to have it a six-player free for all? What do I mean, exactly?

Make it so that if Tom and Dïck(isn't it ironic I can't use that word as an actual name?) both have a mission on Harry, that while both are capable of attacking Harry, they can also attack each other.

I got the idea when rewatching The Empire Strikes Back the other day, and saw the scene with Darth Vader and the Bounty Hunters. They weren't all cooperating to split the Bounty, they were competing against each other to get the Bounty. Well, to be fair, there was a pair who were cooperating, but it wasn't the entire group. Anyway, to me, this makes perfect sense. I could easily see multiple Bounty Hunters firing on thier mark and each other trying to be the one who comes out on top. The way you determine who gets the payout for the job is to see who made the deathblow. The player, or group(if hunters do want to cooperate) who made the deathblow gets the reward. The rest get shafted. This way, the only people participating in the combat are the Hunters with the mission, and whoever has the price on his head.


So, what do you guys think?

---

Except that the multiple Bounty Hunters you mention wouldn't be interested in firing on their mark whilst competing for the deathblow - most of them would actually be Jedi groupies defending him against a single person silly enough to try a bounty in this system.

Very nice from an idealistic RP perspective, but I seriously doubt that what the system is intended to achieve would ever happen.

First idea, I like. I'm all for more control over player cities. I don't think it's non-consensual pvp, you have a chance to leave.

Second Idea, it violates the Bounty Hunters Creed, you're not supposed to harm another bounty hunter, unless they themselves are the mark, nor are you supposed to impede their capture of their mark.

first idea. AWESOME!
like Keck said, it's not "forced PvP" because you'd have a chance to get out of the city.
and if some city decides to /cityban you for no reason (i.e. griefing) then report them.
more focus should be put on enforcing player behavior, rather than limiting the game systems to the point of no usefulness.

second idea. pretty cool. but i agree that Jedi will just hire BHs (or bring their friends along) to act as bodyguards.
if they brought group TEFs back it might work though. /shrug.
also yeah, it goes against the Bounty Hunter's Creed, for whatever that's worth.

---

Nicolas_Frost wrote:

Bounty Hunting Players

With the current incarnation which only allows hunting of Jedi(but hopefully hunting of Smugglers sometime in the future), it seems kinda silly that it can be 5 on 1. Would it not make more sense to have it a six-player free for all? What do I mean, exactly?

Make it so that if Tom and Dïck(isn't it ironic I can't use that word as an actual name?) both have a mission on Harry, that while both are capable of attacking Harry, they can also attack each other.

I got the idea when rewatching The Empire Strikes Back the other day, and saw the scene with Darth Vader and the Bounty Hunters. They weren't all cooperating to split the Bounty, they were competing against each other to get the Bounty. Well, to be fair, there was a pair who were cooperating, but it wasn't the entire group. Anyway, to me, this makes perfect sense. I could easily see multiple Bounty Hunters firing on thier mark and each other trying to be the one who comes out on top. The way you determine who gets the payout for the job is to see who made the deathblow. The player, or group(if hunters do want to cooperate) who made the deathblow gets the reward. The rest get shafted. This way, the only people participating in the combat are the Hunters with the mission, and whoever has the price on his head.


So, what do you guys think?

---

Ok, I'm not just saying this because I'm tired, but I LOVE this idea...makes for a MUCH more interesting BH system.

F**king brilliant, if you ask me.

---

Nicolas_Frost wrote:
Okay, I've been thinking over a couple things and wanted to bounce these ideas off of the best community out there before I pitched them in thier proper forums, to see what you guys thought about them, to get some feedback and pump you for information, so that I have spectacular ideas which I could take full credit for later. Anyway, here they are.

City Warn

As you may or may not know, the command "/citywarn" usable by player city Militia members was removed because a bunch of idiots thought it'd be fun to grief a CSR. I think they should consolidate CityWarn's TEF into City Ban.

If a player gets banned from a player city, they have 90 seconds to leave the city before they gain a TEF and are attackable by anyone(there should be a warning that pops up on thier screen, letting them know that they have those 90 seconds to leave). Then make it so that if they reenter the city and they're still banned, that the TEF comes back. That way, the Militia can clear out the trash, and the player can't be griefed, as the player has to make the choice of staying in the town he just got banned in, or leaving so that he doesn't risk death. The bonus is that it can give role-players an "outlaw feel" to be in a city that they've been banned in.

Note: City Ban should still keep people from cloning, shuttling, using city facilities, and so on. This would be an added functionality.

Bounty Hunting Players

With the current incarnation which only allows hunting of Jedi(but hopefully hunting of Smugglers sometime in the future), it seems kinda silly that it can be 5 on 1. Would it not make more sense to have it a six-player free for all? What do I mean, exactly?

Make it so that if Tom and Dïck(isn't it ironic I can't use that word as an actual name?) both have a mission on Harry, that while both are capable of attacking Harry, they can also attack each other.

I got the idea when rewatching The Empire Strikes Back the other day, and saw the scene with Darth Vader and the Bounty Hunters. They weren't all cooperating to split the Bounty, they were competing against each other to get the Bounty. Well, to be fair, there was a pair who were cooperating, but it wasn't the entire group. Anyway, to me, this makes perfect sense. I could easily see multiple Bounty Hunters firing on thier mark and each other trying to be the one who comes out on top. The way you determine who gets the payout for the job is to see who made the deathblow. The player, or group(if hunters do want to cooperate) who made the deathblow gets the reward. The rest get shafted. This way, the only people participating in the combat are the Hunters with the mission, and whoever has the price on his head.


So, what do you guys think?

---

Message Edited by xTekx on 05-23-2005 01:03 PM

---

xTekx wrote:

---

Nicolas_Frost wrote:
Okay, I've been thinking over a couple things and wanted to bounce these ideas off of the best community out there before I pitched them in thier proper forums, to see what you guys thought about them, to get some feedback and pump you for information, so that I have spectacular ideas which I could take full credit for later. Anyway, here they are.

City Warn

As you may or may not know, the command "/citywarn" usable by player city Militia members was removed because a bunch of idiots thought it'd be fun to grief a CSR. I think they should consolidate CityWarn's TEF into City Ban.

If a player gets banned from a player city, they have 90 seconds to leave the city before they gain a TEF and are attackable by anyone(there should be a warning that pops up on thier screen, letting them know that they have those 90 seconds to leave). Then make it so that if they reenter the city and they're still banned, that the TEF comes back. That way, the Militia can clear out the trash, and the player can't be griefed, as the player has to make the choice of staying in the town he just got banned in, or leaving so that he doesn't risk death. The bonus is that it can give role-players an "outlaw feel" to be in a city that they've been banned in.

Note: City Ban should still keep people from cloning, shuttling, using city facilities, and so on. This would be an added functionality.

Bounty Hunting Players

With the current incarnation which only allows hunting of Jedi(but hopefully hunting of Smugglers sometime in the future), it seems kinda silly that it can be 5 on 1. Would it not make more sense to have it a six-player free for all? What do I mean, exactly?

Make it so that if Tom and Dïck(isn't it ironic I can't use that word as an actual name?) both have a mission on Harry, that while both are capable of attacking Harry, they can also attack each other.

I got the idea when rewatching The Empire Strikes Back the other day, and saw the scene with Darth Vader and the Bounty Hunters. They weren't all cooperating to split the Bounty, they were competing against each other to get the Bounty. Well, to be fair, there was a pair who were cooperating, but it wasn't the entire group. Anyway, to me, this makes perfect sense. I could easily see multiple Bounty Hunters firing on thier mark and each other trying to be the one who comes out on top. The way you determine who gets the payout for the job is to see who made the deathblow. The player, or group(if hunters do want to cooperate) who made the deathblow gets the reward. The rest get shafted. This way, the only people participating in the combat are the Hunters with the mission, and whoever has the price on his head.


So, what do you guys think?

---

Both of these idea's are great!!! I would go with them in a heartbeat, or split-second, whichever is faster.

Where I see a problem arising is that people will bring up ways around the BH/Jedi wars. A jedi has a BH friend take a mission on him, he follows the jedi around or is on call so to speak, and when the jedi gets attacked by another BH then the jedi's bh friend can come in and hit that BH preventing him from killing the jedi. That's what's going to happen. But, makes the whole thing interesting none the less.

On the /cityban people who are PvE only will cry loud and hard against this. Especially one person named Treena_Daal(sp). They will say that there should be no way to have to pvp if you don't want to. But then again it comes down to their choice to enter that city that they know they're banned from. So those two arguments are going to collide head on.

But I would support these all the way!

Message Edited by xTekx on 05-23-2005 01:03 PM

---

Okay, the point of having body guards has been raised, and now there's enough to see a way around it. Think about Jabba and Boba, Boba became a personal bodyguard of Jabba. If this mechanic were in place, it could be rationalized as saying Jabba had a mission on himself, and paid Boba to take the mission so that he could combat anyone who came to get Jabba.

As for City Ban, you can invite that Treena into this conversation if you want, I'll spell it out for her(assuming that's a female name) carefully. The system would allow you 90 seconds to leave the City BEFORE being TEFed. Remaining in the city while banned is the same as saying I'm fine with PvP. Returning to the city while banned is the same as saying I'm fine with PvP.

The only other change I can see needed is a option on the city hall's management terminal which lists every single person who is currently banned, and lets you add/remove people manually without having to bring them into the city for pardoning or wait for them to come into the city again to be banned(in the case no Militia were around).

The reason I bring up the City Ban idea is because I'm the head of Babelon's Militia, and I remember back when we could use City Warn. It helped keep people in line, because when idiots arose, we'd ban them, then warn them, which would force them to spawn in some other city.

---

JediArashi wrote:

Nic, I really have no opinion on the City Warn idea, I have zero experience with it, so I can't comment either way.

As far as the BH thing goes, like Yim said there is no such creed. A mark is a mark, and whomever gets the mark gets the bounty, it is a business. I personally love the idea. Even as someone said, Jedi will hire BH bodyguards and bork the system....good!! I'd love to see some more personal style group warfare that isn't strictly GCW. We need more of that in the game. I'd like to see it whenever possible. So what if a Jedi has some buddies sign in for protection, good it makes it more complex and interesting I think.

Roll with it, baby!

---

AHEM! Bounty Hunter's Creed ... so on you.

Oh and, you'll want to scroll up, i accidentally linked it off of a reply to the message.

---

Keck_is_banned wrote:

AHEM! Bounty Hunter's Creed ... so on you.

---

Nonsense!

Guidelines, I say! GUIDELINES!

---

Nicolas_Frost wrote:

Okay, the point of having body guards has been raised, and now there's enough to see a way around it. Think about Jabba and Boba, Boba became a personal bodyguard of Jabba. If this mechanic were in place, it could be rationalized as saying Jabba had a mission on himself, and paid Boba to take the mission so that he could combat anyone who came to get Jabba.

As for City Ban, you can invite that Treena into this conversation if you want, I'll spell it out for her(assuming that's a female name) carefully. The system would allow you 90 seconds to leave the City BEFORE being TEFed. Remaining in the city while banned is the same as saying I'm fine with PvP. Returning to the city while banned is the same as saying I'm fine with PvP.

The only other change I can see needed is a option on the city hall's management terminal which lists every single person who is currently banned, and lets you add/remove people manually without having to bring them into the city for pardoning or wait for them to come into the city again to be banned(in the case no Militia were around).

The reason I bring up the City Ban idea is because I'm the head of Babelon's Militia, and I remember back when we could use City Warn. It helped keep people in line, because when idiots arose, we'd ban them, then warn them, which would force them to spawn in some other city.

---

Having body guards is a good counter-argument to any nay-sayers, if any. If you have no friends then you could definately hire out some BH's to act as your body guard (can you say mercenaries?).

As for Treena, i'm sure you will run across her when you post in the correct forums. Not sure how many she visits. But have seen her post a lot in hte GCW forum and the pilot/jtl forums. She is 100% against PvP of any sort that drags in PvE players without their consent. I even feel she would get rid of pvp completely if the choice were given to her. She's a PvE extremist lol!

I remember the city warn back in the day. It's a good tactic to keep people out of a city that you dont' want. We had an annoying person in our city a couple months ago and could do nothing to get rid of him. He finally dueled me and I sent him on his merry way though lol. So I would be all for getting city warn put back in in some way.

i don't understand why some people are sooo dead set against PvP.
this is an MMORPG. multi-player should mean the players get to interact with each other on varying levels.
one of these levels should be killing each other.
it makes for a more realistic, immersive environment.

of course there should be penalties for random murder.
that EVE game comes to mind as a good example of how "PvP with consequences" would work.

and for people who say that they shouldn't be locked out of any higher rewards for not participating in PvP, well i say this. the risk is higher with PvP, because you have a thinking person behind the controls of your enemy, not some predictable AI NPC.
if i wanted to fight AI i would play a single player console game.

PvE has a place in MMORPGs, but i feel the best MMORPGs are the ones where Players are free to do things as they please, but realizing that there are consequences for all actions they take.
a more free and open MMORPG would result in more immersive and structured virtual societies.

/shrug.
that's my opinion anyway...

and ps - i'm the furthest thing from a powergamer leet dood. i just want immersion. and when game mechanics become too restrictive so as to protect people from dealing with PvP, then immersion just goes right out the window.

there are other, better, more immersive ways to protect people who don't want to run the risk of being killed randomly.

Message Edited by GanymedePharuu on 05-23-2005 02:16 PM