CUEmu - Thread Posts

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:16 am

Sylune_heart wrote:

In response to the first "concern" you listed about visibilty.

Why not make it instead of having two different types of missions. Make the mission payout and "rip off" factor based on your level of faction. What i mean by this is if you choose to get the higher item..and higher pay out, you must be Overt for your chosen alignment.

If your overt and do this mission you gain the "visiblity" on the BH boards, not only that but there is risk that an opposing factional aligned PC could attack you as well. The reward difference would have to be substantial, but this removes the problem of having people who do not wish to engage in PvP. If your willing to go overt for your cause, then you should incur the visibility factor.

The reason i think this is fair is because if you are a known member of a faction you are already more "Visible" then just the average joe schmoe.

Also as far as illegal goods the same could hold true. If your scanned while overt and they find contraband it raises your "Visibility"...where as those who are not factionally aligned will just get atttacked by NPC horde...or incur a stiff fine.

This again has the same reasoning as in my first point. If your willing to be overt then you have to take the risk that your gonna get caught with something illegal.

I am sure both Rebel and Imperial factions frown upon illegal activity, although the Rebels may tolerate more then the empire its still frowned upon.

The idea of Player bounties has been a dream of alot of people since the orginal designe doc of SWG hit the pre beta boards.

I think you will find there are quite a few who will be willing to put on that tag of OVertness and risk everything as long as the reward matches the danger. Thats the biggest issue to tackle in my opinion

Ceta

I like this idea. As I posted before the game already has an established way to say "I want to participate in PvP" and should just be expanded to include other instances. I think this solution would be a fair compromise to both PvE and PvP types as if you are overt you have already stated you want to participate in PvP and if your not you do not get the PC Bounty.

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:24 am

#132

TeeBee wrote:

Summary 1: The key argument was over the impact of "visibility" punishments for ripping off suppliers or failing smuggling missions. There is a portion of the player base that desires PvP and a portion that does not. The main issue is the possibility of "involuntary PvP" or a player gaining a bounty who wants to be a smuggler but not participate in PvP.

Solution: The solution I like most is to have the mission suppliers offer two types of mission for each skill level. The punishments for failing or cheating a mission then become:

Normal Mission: You lose NPC faction with that supplier. You lose a small amount of GCW faction if the supplier belongs toa faction. You could possibly be ambushed by thugs from that supplier.

CriticalMission: Harsher versions of the above + you gain visibility.

The rewards for critical missions would be somewhat higher than normal missions. Also, some types of illegal cargo would only be available via critical missions. The RISK is possible PvP as well as other penalties. The REWARD is rare components (if you cheat the supplier) or better cash.

You need high rewards for non-pvp players as well, by limiting high end rewards (items) to one type of player you tie down the economy in those items. How about failing a critical mission for non-pvps gives a temporary skill loss, as well as faction penalties etc ? Perhaps a 1 hour loss of feign death and last ditch or perhaps the loss of high end slicing, failing the mission means you are below smuggler standards and this is a 1hr 'retraining' scheme (for the continuity guys).

This sounds like a great solution except for the FP part. The only reason I hesitate on this area is, as far as I know currently, the only way to regain FP is to actually be affiliated with one or the other faction which has been clearly stated as "signing up for PvP". So we are still being put back into a system we wish not to participate in. Now if there was a way to regain that FP without participating in the GCW (which is PvP) and not getting TEF's (which is again signing up for PvP) then I would be all for this.

But also, if a non-pvp player was going to temparliy loose a box then it should also be carried over to pvp.... as most pvp'ers have expressed pvp and pve death is not different and in fact pve'ers are already more harshly penalized with armor decay.

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:31 am

#133

LekoDroka wrote:

After playing the jedi revamp, and digging myself out of XP holes earned by dying, I've realized that item decay and a few wounds as the only penalties for death, is just not reasonable. XP loss is much more appropriate. Then perhaps people would take fighting more seriously, and think for a second before engaging everything that moves.

Please consider building XP loss into your list of penalties to draw from, GreenMarine.

Thanks,

Leko

I do not like this idea, one of the reasons I quit playing EQ, was that it actually sucked all the fun out of the game trying to regain "rewards" over and over simply because of bad game mechanics or warping mobs or uncontrolable situations (LD, Lag, etc). I can see it in an Advance profession like Jedi as it is an advance profession... it was designed for those that want a harder way to play. Smuggler is not an advance profession though, it is an Elite profession which comes as one of the starter professions out of the box.

I also, if I remember right, believe this was discussed in beta and was agreed not to go in.

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

LordMaxx

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:32 am

#134

I have an idea I just thought of the for the illegality of slicing market...

Many players have mentioned that slicing GUI should come up much like the experimentation GUI when a weaponsmith makes a weapon and the slicer chooses where to put his points. I.e. they can put some of thier "slicing" points into damage and some into speed etc etc...

While I DO NOT like pick a slice, if this is where you are going, I would prefer this method. Also it would allow for a new component, the smuggler could put SOME of his points into legality (covering up his tracks) each point of slicing he puts into damage, effciency, encumbrance, etc Or each point he puts into "slicing" if we dont have PoS will raise the weapons "visibility" the higher that gets, the easier it can be scanned. The smuggler can put some of his/her points into coverup which will lower that number...this would not put as much power into the slicing portion, but help the consumer. And would give a better feel for actually slicing a weapon.

Now many times a consumer may just say put it all into damage, or put it all into "slicing" (if PoS is not available) and it will go quickly much as slicing does today, in fact there could be a button to that affect to not even go into the "slicing" GUI, but if the smuggler takes care to balance the weapon and go over each step with the consumer the immersion and realistic feel of the slicing part of smuggling would be great.

Maxx Wolfe
"I...I...I...I...Im not your steppin' stone!" - The Monkees
Leader of Team Desert Eagle and Founder of PATGWNIWNU a offshoot of RATGWNIWNU!
Chilastra/Valcyn/TC

Sylune_heart

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:38 am

#135

I retract my previous idea about being Overt for taking the PvP risk, Sbob pointed out why this would hurt the factioned players even more then they are now.

So i guess the real issue here is deciding on a course of punishment for non aligned neutral smugglers that doesnt force them into PvP against they're will.

Correct me if i am wrong but way back pre beta in the orginal designe documentation there was going to be a type of "Jail" time associated with illegal activity within player city limits if someone broke the law. Why not revist this as a possible punishment for non pvp folks. If they gain enough visibility to merit being punished instead of issuing a bounty, any local authority forces that spot this player would attempt to take them into custody, if you resist then they attack you. If you manage to kill them all then and only then will you gain enough infamy to get slapped up on the BH boards. If you don't resist they escort you to a holding location, at such time your inventory will be unusable. And any armor or weapons your wearing will automatically be put into your iventory.

You cannot leave the holding area by any means, there will be a timer for your jail time based on the amount of visibility you had incurred up to that point. The max jail time maybe being like 25minutes for the highest level of visibility possible. Once the timer tics off your visibility is reset to zero. Having paid your debt to society. Before you are allowed out of your sell a new scan would be done on your person, all items in your inventory that are "illegal" will be found, and 1 random item is taken from that as being "confiscated".

After you are set free after say a 2 hour grace period any local authority the was part of your orginal incarceration would scan you ...as you are a known offender. Again if any items on your person are found to be illegal 1 random item will be removed from your inventory. After this first intial post jail time scan is made then your back in good standing with the authorities, and your visibility is set at zero.

I realize this may be beyond your ability to make the code works solidly, but it is a way to have missions be the same across the board for all parties involved, no need to have two separate mission types. At the point of arrest the person who wants to engage in pvp has every oppurtunity to attempt to do so by resisting arrest and getting a bounty placed on them.

This kills two birds with one stone. It gives an even punishment across the board for all smugglers, and players no matter if they are willing to PvP or not.

I don't know how you guys will think about this but at least think on it and give any suggestions to add to this idea if you have any.

I would also like to add in here one final thought on this issue.

If you have a system simliar to the one above you are also contributing to the player economy, because confiscated items will leave the world..and have to be replaced by a player crafter. This will create a bit more churn in the crafting professions as a side effect therby increasing the economic status of the server. A healthy economy is one where there is supply and demand, we already have plenty of money sinks to remove excess credits, but thus far the decay system is proving too slow for some crafters to keep their head above water. There needs to be more churn in the economy and i think if something like the above were implemented it would jump start the economy a bit

Ceta

Message Edited by Sylune_heart on 06-22-2004 11:50 AM

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:39 am

#136

Oculus wrote:

GreenMarine wrote:

What about normal players scanned with illegal items? For now, it seems reasonable that we don't add visibility for normal players. That's too much to ask of the player base as a whole. Later, we could possibly add a level of illegality above Highly Illegal (say, Military Class) that gains visibility. It seems wise to leave this area open for future discuss, but not include it in a revamp.

I'm sorry I'm a bit baffled by this one.

I take it "normal" players are neutral players? So legality and visibility is only going to affect factioned players if I understand this right?

I'd just like to point out that there'd better be some major improvements to the GCW experience in the GCW revamp if every time new features are introduced neutrals can just go by their business.

Neutrals and faction players do the same stuff in this game. We compete for the same things and if everything that has the potential to be even the slightest inconvenience is always kept away from neutrals I, for one, and I think a lot of other players to are going to reconsider our investment in the GCW. Useless faction perks and Leia's Themepark are not enough to justify not just going neutral and get all the content and none of the hassle. I mean, neutral Smugglers will get to play with all the cool revamp features as well, won't they?

I certainly want to see the Smuggler revamp happen, as cool and as fast as possible but be careful how much pressure you add to factioned players while keeping the neutrals safe. Especially when there are no tangible rewards for not just dropping the GCW.

Ok, I get confused in this post. It is very clear if you participate in the GCW that you consent to PvP, which I was under the impression that is the whole reason to be in the GCW. Those that wish not to participate in PvP simply stay out of the factions and thus have chosen not to PvP.

Players are players, all of them pay the same amount each month for the same content. One style of play is no better nor any worse then the other, you chose to play in the PvP realm while I choose to stay in the PvE realm. To me it is more exciting and challanging to go up against a PvE mob then a PvP PC. You feel the better challanged against a PvP PC then a PvE mob... I respect that

But yes smugglers are smugglers they deserve the same treatment regardless of choosen playstyle.

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:44 am

#137

Marcus-Reighn wrote:

When I think of smuggler I think of Han Solo, and him always being chased by bounty hunters. Who is to say that these bounty hunters that chase our player smugglers would have to be players as well. For those not concented to PVP, perhaps NPC bounty hunters could be generated instead of the plain storm trooper spawn. When caught perhaps the player could be presented with an option to pay off the NPC BH, kill him/her, or run from them. The latter would be harder to implement I imagine, an NPC BH chasing a player smuggler via bike, but it is a cool concept.

Exactly

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

StarladySWG

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:45 am

#138

Solution: The solution I like most is to have the mission suppliers offer two types of mission for each skill level. The punishments for failing or cheating a mission then become:

Normal Mission: You lose NPC faction with that supplier. You lose a small amount of GCW faction if the supplier belongs toa faction. You could possibly be ambushed by thugs from that supplier.

CriticalMission: Harsher versions of the above + you gain visibility.

A perfect solution. I'mSmuggler whostrongly dislikes PvP. I was planning not totake any Smuggling missions as a way to avoidvisibility and possible forcedunconsentual PvP. Under the new plan,Smugglers who don't like PvP can still takeSmuggler missions and not worry about failing the mission.

What about normal players scanned with illegal items? For now, it seems reasonable that we don't add visibility for normal players. That's too much to ask of the player base as a whole. Later, we could possibly add a level of illegality above Highly Illegal (say, Military Class) that gains visibility. It seems wise to leave this area open for future discuss, but not include it in a revamp.

A wise decision.

It seems that we should make more factions other than Imperial scan. Why can't the Rebels scan in a Rebel controlled territory? They aren't going to like spice abuse much either. Rebel commanders could then have some immunity from scans in their home regions. Naboo's Royal Security Force (a neutral faction) might also scan and have their own forces to deal with violators.

Good idea. Why should Imperialsbe the only ones to scan for harmful goods? And high-ranking Imperialplayer charactersshould not be immune to scans, no matter who does the scanning. From the Imperial viewpoint, illegal is illegal, and a high-ranking Imperial should get the same (or worse!) punishment as anyone else.

Bryan1138

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:46 am

#139

GreenMarine wrote:

On the issue of needing to be factioned to be TEF'd to be attacked by stormtroopers...

What if attacks from contraband violations ignore faction or come from "unfactioned" versions of the NPCs? I'm not sure if this meshes with Keldarin's plans for GCW consistancy, so I have to talk to him, but this would mean that being scanned and attacked would not result in a faction TEF. You wouldn't suddenly get ganked by other factional players because you were scanned.

This also solves the farming problem, because these NPCs would no longer give faction points.

Just one possibility...

I would like to see unfactioned scans. This would allow for smuggling without being subject to PvP. I like this solution as is, but would add the following for thosewho might think they are getting cheated out of a PvP opportunity:

Another solution you might consider GM is that neutral players would get an "unfactioned" and thus PvE response to scans while someone ofa faction would possibly get a "factioned" response - Imp or Rebel. If possible you could take into account their rank and declared statusas far as a percent chance of getting a factioned response as opposed to the normal, non-factioned response (higher rank = greater chance of triggering a faction response).

So: Neutrals - only PvE response to scans

Coverts - percent chance of PvP response (TEF) based on rank - low level almost no chance, high level rank maybe a 25-50% chance

Overts - double the chance of Coverts - low level, still not as much of a chance, high to very high rank somewhere between 50-99% chance, depending on rank, degree of infraction, and the max point you want to set factioned attacks on scans in accordance with the GCW.

Bryan1138
aka Bryan'sa Fickset on Bria
WS resource fire sale at: 890, -4700 on Correlia 500 m east of Coronet, Bria server!
aka Bryanosk on Radiant

StarladySWG

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:49 am

#140

GreenMarine wrote:

On the issue of needing to be factioned to be TEF'd to be attacked by stormtroopers...

What if attacks from contraband violations ignore faction or come from "unfactioned" versions of the NPCs? I'm not sure if this meshes with Keldarin's plans for GCW consistancy, so I have to talk to him, but this would mean that being scanned and attacked would not result in a faction TEF. You wouldn't suddenly get ganked by other factional players because you were scanned.

This also solves the farming problem, because these NPCs would no longer give faction points.

Just one possibility...

Good idea. Giving a TEF to Neutral characters is not acceptable, and this is a good way around that.

Nerj

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:54 am

#141

RellikCro wrote:

Marcus-Reighn wrote:

When I think of smuggler I think of Han Solo, and him always being chased by bounty hunters. Who is to say that these bounty hunters that chase our player smugglers would have to be players as well. For those not concented to PVP, perhaps NPC bounty hunters could be generated instead of the plain storm trooper spawn. When caught perhaps the player could be presented with an option to pay off the NPC BH, kill him/her, or run from them. The latter would be harder to implement I imagine, an NPC BH chasing a player smuggler via bike, but it is a cool concept.

Exactly

GreenMarine wrote:

silversaber wrote:

I mean, how hard is it for you guys to make a NPC that hashit points greater than a Playerfully buffed? That can see through FD? That can go through any wall? That can have twice the firepower than any player can have?

Message Edited by silversaber on 06-22-2004 12:01 AM

The point isn't to create an insurmountable challenge. We can ensure the PvE smuggling missions will be fun and challenging for all players according to their skill level.

The addition of missions with a visibility/PvP/bounty aspect is to enhance the game for the players who are interested in pursuing that kind of gameplay. It doesn't exclude PvEers from anything but what they want to be excluded from.

silversaber wrote:

So, why are we going to be stuck with lesser missions witha lesser reward?

Message Edited by silversaber on 06-22-2004 12:01 AM

All due respect, but that's a very loaded statement.The quality of the missions and the quality of the reward will be worthwhile. The only difference is that there is a path for PvPers and that path includes additional rewards. Why? Because of the increased risk. While not every bounty hunter is awesome at his job, some will be. In my original post, I also pointed out that the other punishments will also be more severe. The increased risk doesn't only include the potential PvP.

Visibility decreases over time. There's nothing preventing you from occaisionally taking a high risk mission. If you manage your visibility well, you won't have to be involved in PvP. But you would be walking the line...and getting improved rewards for your increased risk.

silversaber wrote:

No matter how tasty the Devs try make the GCW PvP look,
the PK mentality of PvPrs will poison it for the rest of the Players.

Message Edited by silversaber on 06-22-2004 12:01 AM

This simply isn't true. While you may not enjoy PvP, or you may have had bad experiences, a large number of the player base regularly play PvP. You know it's important for the devs to have a realistic view of the game. It's just as important that you have one.

We make an effort to design systems that appeal to both PvE and PvP players. You have to find a way to compromise your view with that of the PvPers, because they aren't going away, just as you like to remind PvPers that you aren't going away.

I think Green Marine has this covered

Valcyn - Master Marksman Master Commando, Master Smuggler From Tiggs: -- Two words -- Bring it!

WE WILL NOT TIRE, WE WILL NOT FALTER, AND WE WILL NOT FAIL

RellikCro

Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:56 am

#142

IndySWG wrote:

GreenMarine wrote:

The point isn't to create an insurmountable challenge. We can ensure the PvE smuggling missions will be fun and challenging for all players according to their skill level.

The addition of missions with a visibility/PvP/bounty aspect is to enhance the game for the players who are interested in pursuing that kind of gameplay. It doesn't exclude PvEers from anything but what they want to be excluded from.

silversaber wrote:

So, why are we going to be stuck with lesser missions witha lesser reward?

Message Edited by silversaber on 06-22-2004 12:01 AM

All due respect, but that's a very loaded statement.The quality of the missions and the quality of the reward will be worthwhile. The only difference is that there is a path for PvPers and that path includes additional rewards. Why? Because of the increased risk. While not every bounty hunter is awesome at his job, some will be. In my original post, I also pointed out that the other punishments will also be more severe. The increased risk doesn't only include the potential PvP.

Um.. talk about a loaded statement.

If the PvPers get better loot becase of increased risk .. then you need to come up with an acceptably higher PvE risk option. Otherwise whole abilities of the profession are left to people who want to do PvP.

GM just cause you like PvP doesnt mean that should be the most rewarding aspect of every profession out there.

GreenMarine wrote:

The point isn't to create an insurmountable challenge. We can ensure the PvE smuggling missions will be fun and challenging for all players according to their skill level.

The addition of missions with a visibility/PvP/bounty aspect is to enhance the game for the players who are interested in pursuing that kind of gameplay. It doesn't exclude PvEers from anything but what they want to be excluded from

That's just plain insulting. This isn't a choice ... you have said yourself quite well that some players just do not have fun ... and rather actively have the opposite of fun thanks to PvP. If you make the most rewarding / profitable part of the proffession PvP ... that's not their choice you are punishing players who dont enjoy the same play style as you.

I agree PvP is a cool aspect to the new revamp ... but it should not be the "high end" content of the profession...it shoud simply be an alternate form of content for it.

I would just like to ask why everyone thinks PvP is higher risk? According to GM's own post regarding why players do not like to participate in PvP the actualy "end risk", the dying, was not even a factor. Risk has nothing to do with why we do not want to PvP, it has alot more to do with the other reasons GM posted and it has alot to do with it ruining our gaming experience.

I have and will continue to look for compromises that will be beneficial to all players, but I am not going to suggest or support solutions that punish one or the other in rewards. Both styles can be equally created with the same amount of "risks" it is just coming up with the correct solutions to do it that is holding us back.

Rellikcro

Rifle/CH/Medic - Freelance Pilot
Pistoleer/Commando/Bounty Hunter/Medic - Imperial Pilot
Politician/ID/Musician

silversaber

Tue Jun 22, 2004 12:02 pm

#143

IndySWG wrote:

This sounds well and good (and somewhat used to looking over my shoulder for BHs from playing Jedi I'm sure I'll give the PVP missions a go once or twice) ... but ...

This is still penalizing the player who choses non-PvP playstyles. "Well if you dont wanna play PvP you can't do the really cool missions" ... I mean...this isn't destroying a player base...it's a mission....and you've limited access to the really good ones to only those who PvP. You guys made the game of "optional PvP" ... you have to stick with it.

We need to come up with some significant PvE risk worthy of the same high level PvP Missions. Perhaps PvE'ers could have a high end mission which risks an experience debt (like the new jedi system).

Exactly.

Smuggler Archive

Thread: Revamp Discussion: Contraband/Missions PART 2 (Solutions)