Team Deathmatch ? ... bringing magic back to PW

[Splintert]

Once again, Nov, you've gone to both extremes. There is a place for both styles of play 'TDM' and 'RP' (Red and Green). From my point of view, 75% of role play should lead into a TDM. This is because people get bored. Besides, it's a wargame, and wargames have war. The remaining 25% of role play (Green) is usually the peaceful roles like tavern role play and dumb humor.

In order to achieve that...
Rules should only enforce hard, definite actions. An example would be the first PW no-killing zone in the town armoury on Oceania. You either killed someone in the armoury or you didn't, no questions asked. Rules that try to enforce degrees of role play are considerably harder to create without loopholes and are extremely subjective to how the admin thinks things should be done. Such examples include "legitimate reason for war". What constitutes legitimate? Subjective rules leave room for favoritism and unfair enforcement of rules.

There's no need to have solely red or green playstyles, but a mix of both. Oh, the magic you're talking about is this: dumb humor

 

[Richard Shru]

Once again, Nov, you've gone to both extremes. There is a place for both styles of play 'TDM' and 'RP' (Red and Green). From my point of view, 75% of role play should lead into a TDM. This is because people get bored. Besides, it's a wargame, and wargames have war. The remaining 25% of role play (Green) is usually the peaceful roles like tavern role play and dumb humor.

In order to achieve that...
Rules should only enforce hard, definite actions. An example would be the first PW no-killing zone in the town armoury on Oceania. You either killed someone in the armoury or you didn't, no questions asked. Rules that try to enforce degrees of role play are considerably harder to create without loopholes and are extremely subjective to how the admin thinks things should be done. Such examples include "legitimate reason for war". What constitutes legitimate? Subjective rules leave room for favoritism and unfair enforcement of rules.

There's no need to have solely red or green playstyles, but a mix of both. Oh, the magic you're talking about is this: dumb humor

I personally find myself of the opinion that taking a more organic approach to things is just more suiting. TDM and Roleplay are not mutually exclusive. The problem is that there's no "Persistence" in "Persistent World":

1) You start a faction, you put alot of money into it, and you attempt to recruit people. No matter what you do, or how hard you try, that faction is going to die out before the day is over. And this leads to situations where the entire world of politics changes drastically from day 1 to day 2.

2) The entire economy is at best unstable, because there can't be any retention of items or money to any real extent (when logging out or crashing costs me 20% of my current net worth, notwithstanding the loss of 20-30k gear, it gets expensive to play PW). Further, because factions last on average barely 2 hours, and the entire world is so overtly hostile, its impossible to set up even a stable local economy for one faction (you need to focus more on fighting, because if you don't then your own men get bored, and you lose them, so good luck even trying to assign people to guard duty on a group of serfs).

3) The entire world is hostile in game. Due to concepts like NLR (which, if strictly enforced, pretty much ensure you will go through 1-2 of your in game relatives per day), you cannot have any reliable roleplay continue past a few hours.

4) Due to the level of even greater agressiveness from the individuals who don't roleplay in any regard, you find yourself paying roughly 1/3 of your earnings for even an hour of mining in order to avoid death (possibly even more simply due to being killed).

5) Due to server resets and map changes, the entire world which was already barely persistent suddenly gets either a clean wipe (restarting the process from scratch), or a complete region-shift which rather kills any chance for having persistent kingdoms, systems, etc.

 

[Splintert]

Then quit trying to be persistent. Play the game for what it is, not what you're trying to form it to be. Pwmod is not clay, it is a concrete foundation. Role play cannot be persistent and therefore shouldn't be.

My solution to the problem you're facing is to just drop the persistent characters and do what you want to do, when you want to do it. 'Splintert' does not exist in the Pwmod lore. I just use 'Splintert' as a name to be referred as, sometimes I am a mercenary, Lord, or robber. It all depends on what I want to do for that play session. The other solution to the persistence problem is playing off every death as a deathly wound. However, that just becomes humorous as to what your character is able to survive and get back to the battlefield within an hour.

Peaceful role play can exist. Persistence cannot. It is a persistent world, not a persistent universe. Lore and political climates and everything changes rapidly and unless you can think of a good, realistic or even logical reason for it, just play along with it.

The community's idea of Pwmod (aka Persistent World) has warped from a large deathmatch game mode with factions into a crude alternate reality.

 

[NOVICIUS]

Once again, Nov, you've gone to both extremes. There is a place for both styles of play 'TDM' and 'RP' (Red and Green). From my point of view, 75% of role play should lead into a TDM. This is because people get bored. Besides, it's a wargame, and wargames have war. The remaining 25% of role play (Green) is usually the peaceful roles like tavern role play and dumb humor.

In order to achieve that...
Rules should only enforce hard, definite actions. An example would be the first PW no-killing zone in the town armoury on Oceania. You either killed someone in the armoury or you didn't, no questions asked. Rules that try to enforce degrees of role play are considerably harder to create without loopholes and are extremely subjective to how the admin thinks things should be done. Such examples include "legitimate reason for war". What constitutes legitimate? Subjective rules leave room for favoritism and unfair enforcement of rules.

There's no need to have solely red or green playstyles, but a mix of both. Oh, the magic you're talking about is this: dumb humor

Then quit trying to be persistent. Play the game for what it is, not what you're trying to form it to be. Pwmod is not clay, it is a concrete foundation. Role play cannot be persistent and therefore shouldn't be.

My solution to the problem you're facing is to just drop the persistent characters and do what you want to do, when you want to do it. 'Splintert' does not exist in the Pwmod lore. I just use 'Splintert' as a name to be referred as, sometimes I am a mercenary, Lord, or robber. It all depends on what I want to do for that play session. The other solution to the persistence problem is playing off every death as a deathly wound. However, that just becomes humorous as to what your character is able to survive and get back to the battlefield within an hour.

Peaceful role play can exist. Persistence cannot. It is a persistent world, not a persistent universe. Lore and political climates and everything changes rapidly and unless you can think of a good, realistic or even logical reason for it, just play along with it.

The community's idea of Pwmod (aka Persistent World) has warped from a large deathmatch game mode with factions into a crude alternate reality.

What can I say.....


Splintert..I love you

You just summon all I wanted to say.

I try to convince community that there is something beatwen hard core(boring) RP and TMD. To create one you need another and opposite.Precisely= this is war game.

 

[Herbiazors]

Ofcourse it is a war mod.. that's why everytime you make a big faction and try to be douchy the people decides to smack you down with a hammer and then violently and slowly torture you intill you leave the game

 

[NOVICIUS]

Ofcourse it is a war mod.. that's why everytime you make a big faction and try to be douchy the people decides to smack you down with a hammer and then violently and slowly torture you intill you leave the game

This is precisely why we need new concept of map. Castles should deffend areas not just be castles for sake of it. It should be design in that way so you have to conquer castle to enter "the kingdom". As "the kingdom" citizen you should be able to work peacefully as long castle is protected by your kingdom soldiers.

 

[Madf11]

Create your own server and or pay for one and then you can be god on it and enjoy making own rules. If you think that your idea is better than others then you'll get a larger player base than RP servers if not you're a douche.

 

[Richard Shru]

Then quit trying to be persistent. Play the game for what it is, not what you're trying to form it to be. Pwmod is not clay, it is a concrete foundation. Role play cannot be persistent and therefore shouldn't be.

My solution to the problem you're facing is to just drop the persistent characters and do what you want to do, when you want to do it. 'Splintert' does not exist in the Pwmod lore. I just use 'Splintert' as a name to be referred as, sometimes I am a mercenary, Lord, or robber. It all depends on what I want to do for that play session. The other solution to the persistence problem is playing off every death as a deathly wound. However, that just becomes humorous as to what your character is able to survive and get back to the battlefield within an hour.

Peaceful role play can exist. Persistence cannot. It is a persistent world, not a persistent universe. Lore and political climates and everything changes rapidly and unless you can think of a good, realistic or even logical reason for it, just play along with it.

The community's idea of Pwmod (aka Persistent World) has warped from a large deathmatch game mode with factions into a crude alternate reality.

Quite simply put, I disagree, and I see no reason to change my paradigm. We've already seen in the numbers that the majority of the poll is roleplay-oriented, so I'm sure that changes to the game to promote greater roleplay are appealing to the clear, numerical majority. Better quality roleplay requires some small level of consistency, or persistence. As such, I contend that the problems I laid out before are just that...problems. Not the concrete foundation to a game, but problems hindering the current mod from being all it can be.

 

[Serann]

The matter of the fact is, that the mod can't really change people.

PW mod offers war for war people like splint and RP for serious RPers like Emperor John *Snort* Ahem, sorry, but Emperor John sounds... incredibly silly, was it supposed to be like that?

Either way, the RP community has found a mod to RP in and it will, no matter how warlike the rest is. If the servers would become TDM, the RPers would move on to a different mod, or a different server, if one still offered idle RP. The point being: You don't need to find the right options for the people, the people will eventually find you.

Sure, they will ***** and complain, like I like to do, but eventually, everyone will go where he belongs.
And that's why I'm on NA, where factions are rare and TDM doesn't happen nearly as often as EU.

Eu, is basicly, a TDM server. 90% of the people couldn't RP to save their life, and quite frankly, I can't fathom why the last 10% are still there, to be honest.
So, if you are going to radicly split the methods of playing into RP and TDM, I would say: we have that now.

 

[Rasorath]

Eu, is basicly, a TDM server. 90% of the people couldn't RP to save their life, and quite frankly, I can't fathom why the last 10% are still there, to be honest.

Are you talking about the European world region or are you talking about a European server? If so; which one?

[quote author=Eragon91]People that say there is no roleplay usually don't even know what it is, nor do they try to create it. They just expect it to come running to them, then blame the server they're playing on for their own shortcomings.[/quote]

 

[akak95]

Well if you want i can put up a freeplay for like a month on my server if it will not get out of control i can keep it.

 

[killer110]

Eu, is basicly, a TDM server. 90% of the people couldn't RP to save their life, and quite frankly, I can't fathom why the last 10% are still there, to be honest.

Are you talking about the European world region or are you talking about a European server? If so; which one?

[quote author=Eragon91]People that say there is no roleplay usually don't even know what it is, nor do they try to create it. They just expect it to come running to them, then blame the server they're playing on for their own shortcomings.

[/quote]
Hope that answers your question.

 

[Rasorath]

Indeed it did, I guess I read it too fast.

 

[Richard Shru]

The matter of the fact is, that the mod can't really change people.

PW mod offers war for war people like splint and RP for serious RPers like Emperor John *Snort* Ahem, sorry, but Emperor John sounds... incredibly silly, was it supposed to be like that?

Either way, the RP community has found a mod to RP in and it will, no matter how warlike the rest is. If the servers would become TDM, the RPers would move on to a different mod, or a different server, if one still offered idle RP. The point being: You don't need to find the right options for the people, the people will eventually find you.

Sure, they will ***** and complain, like I like to do, but eventually, everyone will go where he belongs.
And that's why I'm on NA, where factions are rare and TDM doesn't happen nearly as often as EU.

Eu, is basicly, a TDM server. 90% of the people couldn't RP to save their life, and quite frankly, I can't fathom why the last 10% are still there, to be honest.
So, if you are going to radicly split the methods of playing into RP and TDM, I would say: we have that now.

Actually, the amusing part is its only silly if you metagame the name =p. In every introduction, he says his full name:

Emperor Johanius Tiberius Caldaria

If you're wondering if I misspelled calraida, then yes I did, I just like the sound of it now though so I decided to keep it for my character as a small twist =p. Among friends, he's known as John though.

But back on topic...

I'm not advocating for greater TDM fests, quite the opposite actually . I'm also not saying I'd remove every weapon in the game and have us all chat like fine dapper gentlemen over tea and crumpets while a single log burns in the fireplace of our elaborate east-side mansion with the butler running in silver platter's of finger sandwiches.

I agree that there has to be a combination, I just don't think the current world view is consistent with what I believe to be ideal. For example...I have a growing army of bannermen flocking to my cause. I pay them well, 25k a day paid at the end of every week. I meet face to face to interact with my officers, and discuss plans. I meet with my financial backers and speak with them as well. I also do not rp perma death if my character dies, since I reserve the right to determine when he does or doesn't get killed off (all deaths I treat as serious concussions or 'hospitalizations'). In any case though...when it comes time to fight, especially in large scale unit-on-unit or army-on-army battles, I don't describe every aspect of my character's actions, but instead use the game mechanics to play it out.

And I dare say, the battles you achieve when you have a core of reliable, persistent supports are LARGER, and thus MORE entertaining, then simply resource based random TDM in a political scape that changes every few hours.

But, this is all simply my opinion. I just feel the need to point out though that trying to move to a less roleplay oriented modification is clearly not in line with the majority opinion of this poll (which is overwhelmingly in support of Roleplay). And since a core aspect of good roleplay is persistence, I feel the numbers show the common denominator of this equation.

 

[Splintert]

Role play is too broad. Because of the way the community titles things, 'randoming' 'rdm' 'deathmatching' versus 'role play' and 'rp', not role playing simply means swinging your sword at everything that moves. Of course people are going to vote for not-swinging your sword at everything.

The poll is inherently imbalanced.

However, the forum community wants role play. That's how it's been since RCC v2 and that's how it always will be. One of RCC's hardest jobs was to convince the forum users that they aren't the only voice of the mod.

tl;dr (it's not even that long): Forum community != game community.

 

[Richard Shru]

Role play is too broad. Because of the way the community titles things, 'randoming' 'rdm' 'deathmatching' versus 'role play' and 'rp', not role playing simply means swinging your sword at everything that moves. Of course people are going to vote for not-swinging your sword at everything.

The poll is inherently imbalanced.

However, the forum community wants role play. That's how it's been since RCC v2 and that's how it always will be. One of RCC's hardest jobs was to convince the forum users that they aren't the only voice of the mod.

tl;dr (it's not even that long): Forum community != game community.

What are you, Nixon making the Silent Majority argument? =p

That's an inherently dangerous philosophy to follow, and I'll tell you why. The forum-goer's are the ones who put the time and effort into communicating their opinions on these subjects to the developers and other such officials. To disregard them as a minority to the actual game population means your forums becomes inactive...

Forums are one of the first things people look at before playing a game.

Furthermore, forum goers represent your active and dedicated user base. Lose them, and you're potentially left with nothing other than a smaller population of mercenary thinking players who join for a few hours and leave.

Finally, I'd like to see one statistic that says that even the in game population disagrees with the contents of this poll =p. And I also don't see how its biased in phrasing, as its litterally 2 words.

 

[Suspicous Pilgrim]

This thread is quite egotistical.

 

[Splintert]

What are you, Nixon making the Silent Majority argument? =p

That's an inherently dangerous philosophy to follow, and I'll tell you why. The forum-goer's are the ones who put the time and effort into communicating their opinions on these subjects to the developers and other such officials. To disregard them as a minority to the actual game population means your forums becomes inactive...

Forums are one of the first things people look at before playing a game.

Furthermore, forum goers represent your active and dedicated user base. Lose them, and you're potentially left with nothing other than a smaller population of mercenary thinking players who join for a few hours and leave.

Finally, I'd like to see one statistic that says that even the in game population disagrees with the contents of this poll =p. And I also don't see how its biased in phrasing, as its litterally 2 words.

Yes I am making that argument

Din't you read? Most people consider role play to be anything from "Hand over your sword or I gut you" to extensive, drawn out and somewhat overkill styles of role play.

Yes, the forums are the dedicated userbase, I think we've had this argument before actually, but we have to cater somewhat to the come-and-go population for the health of the mod. High playercounts attract people.

 

[Serann]

Actually, high player counts is exactly what we don't want on NA, because it attracts the people who do not RP.

And believe it or not: yes, no RP does eventually lead to random sword swinging.
For example: we had the "French Kingdom" on NA, an average faction of EU. And of course, they didn't fit in.
There were no wars for them and so, they quickly became an annoyence and started randoming.

So it seems that yes, no RP does in fact mean randoming, if the person is stuck in a "full" RP server

 

[Richard Shru]

Actually, high player counts is exactly what we don't want on NA, because it attracts the people who do not RP.

And believe it or not: yes, no RP does eventually lead to random sword swinging.
For example: we had the "French Kingdom" on NA, an average faction of EU. And of course, they didn't fit in.
There were no wars for them and so, they quickly became an annoyence and started randoming.

So it seems that yes, no RP does in fact mean randoming, if the person is stuck in a "full" RP server

Well, glad to see we're in agreement =p.

In my opinion, in addition to just having RPer's and Non Rper's, there's also multiple levels of roleplay that you need to cater to. For example, I'm a moderate roleplayer. I like to go into detail, I engage in long IC conversations, and enjoy politics, intrigue, etc. However, I still enjoy nonsensical or rather far-fetched roleplay (when its done well), such as Vampires, Werewolves, etc. I'm fairly open minded. Some things that would support this game mechanics wise are persistent cash and item inventories, persistent invite-only factions, etc.

Now, there's also Light roleplay, which is essentially just the politics and intrigue occasionally mixed in with many, many battles, taxes, etc. You could call it slightly more roleplay than the alleged 'roots' of the mod. An example of this would be a faction in game called "The Werewolves", who go around howling and such, trying to rob people, and negotiating with other kingdoms. They won't sit down for a conversation for more than 15 minutes and experiance essentially 'memory loss' every few hours when their character takes on a new role (such as switching from a Werewolf to a Vampire because of bordom). Some game mechanics that would help this would be things like increased weapons, easier means of amassing money, and other things that lead to action far more quickly.

Then there's Heavy roleplay, which is a step above medium roleplay. This is where you have players that attempt to realistically create/recreate a world with very specific codes of conduct (for example, there would be no tolerance of Islam in Christian lands, or Serfs would be killed/tortured for failing to show proper respect to a higher member of society). Game mechanics that would help them out would be in game limitations for factions (for example, if you're apart of an ethnic muslim faction, you couldn't use European armor or weapons even if they were dropped), and other such things to promote realism.

Finally, there's non roleplayers. This is an easy demographic to track, since they don't assume an alternate identity, and simply set out to enjoy themselves (usually by means of instant gratification methods, like fighting, or amassing large amounts of money). An example of this would be a faction called "Blackwater USA", which does nothing other than rob people, fight, and kill for the hell of it. Another example would be randomers (in the more extreme end of this polarization). Game mechanics that would help them out would be things like balanced weapons, additional ways to make money and purchase different goods, etc.

With all that said...

I think that the best approach is not to have one server catering to all of these demographics, as it leads to frustration and a high turnover rate for players. Instead, by focusing on a niche, and having competitively hosted servers, you can accommodate the play-styles of each demographic individually.