Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 111
  1. #1

    The Switch - Lessons from another game

    Anything that gives a player the ability to dodge accountability, in an accountability driven game is a huge, glaring, potential exploit.

    A large and well organized pvp tribe will have multiple people with 2 accounts (or more)...of course that assuming that we get a game delivered that actually delivers...Second accounts will be used to set up crafting alts. Crafting alts will be set up in quaint little unassuming villages with names like, Springwater Trading Company, Bobs Bed and Breakfast, etc. etc. The mission of these alt towns will be to craft items for the tribes militant branch.

    This frees up the military wing of the tribe to act completely without consequence...the logistics that drive their machine can not be shut down, or even hindered, since they are protected.

    In sb this existed - fly catcher trees: just a bind point that players from a guild would use to stage raids on assaults on others. If someone seiged it, usually they would not even show because it was easily replaceable. Typically groups would have a built up 'roller city' where they funneled their cash and resources to produce weapons. Players spent huge amount of time trying to track down the 'real owners' of roller towns, sometimes seiging them just to see who showed up. The flyl catcher: roller town dynamic was bad, since it mostly removed accountability from the game.

    The system that is on its way to implementation is worse, as the players will not be able to hold these new 'craft tribes' accountable for the actions of their parent tribe.

    Please think about the ways we can abuse a system before it gets implemented...if it can be, we will do it...it's in our nature. Unfortunately.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    www.theburninghorde.com

  2. #2
    My solution would be to keep a watch on the offending "crafter tribe". Every time foraging parties set out from it, jump them and send them home packing naked. Eventually they'll get the message and it will be a hell of a lot of fun. On the old WAR server on SB, that's what we did agains the bigger "empire" guilds...

    What is best in life?

    To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Dubanka View Post
    Anything that gives a player the ability to dodge accountability, in an accountability driven game is a huge, glaring, potential exploit.

    A large and well organized pvp tribe will have multiple people with 2 accounts (or more)...of course that assuming that we get a game delivered that actually delivers...Second accounts will be used to set up crafting alts. Crafting alts will be set up in quaint little unassuming villages with names like, Springwater Trading Company, Bobs Bed and Breakfast, etc. etc. The mission of these alt towns will be to craft items for the tribes militant branch.

    This frees up the military wing of the tribe to act completely without consequence...the logistics that drive their machine can not be shut down, or even hindered, since they are protected.

    In sb this existed - fly catcher trees: just a bind point that players from a guild would use to stage raids on assaults on others. If someone seiged it, usually they would not even show because it was easily replaceable. Typically groups would have a built up 'roller city' where they funneled their cash and resources to produce weapons. Players spent huge amount of time trying to track down the 'real owners' of roller towns, sometimes seiging them just to see who showed up. The flyl catcher: roller town dynamic was bad, since it mostly removed accountability from the game.

    The system that is on its way to implementation is worse, as the players will not be able to hold these new 'craft tribes' accountable for the actions of their parent tribe.

    Please think about the ways we can abuse a system before it gets implemented...if it can be, we will do it...it's in our nature. Unfortunately.
    I fully agree.

    There could be ways to think outside the box for a solution, though. It all comes down to what benefits there are to declare a tribe for war. If the benefits are mostly superfluous, then we have major problems. But what if the benefits were truly epic & required to maintain progress?

    Off the top of my head, I'm thinking about crafting machines. Only warring tribes would be able to venture into certain parts of the wilderness & discover lost technology that allows mass production. It could also be that these machines allow for the creation of MUCH BETTER combat gear & city defense structures. And here is the catch, these machines can ONLY be placed in the tribal zones of warring tribes. This will eliminate the effectiveness alt tribes & let crafter tribes know that they will never have access to all the game offers unless they accept some element of risk.

  4. #4
    If you can track the amount of trade between certain tribes, maybe the alignment of a trade tribe city can be shifted with those regards? A fully neutral trade colony wouldn't necessarily care who they trade with, but if a tribe traded with only neutral people or only good people then one could consider them taking sides. This would mean the neutral/trade tribe would need to be aware or have a mechanic that explained their trading alignment and they could then NEED to refuse trade towards one alignment or the other in order to remain neutral.

    Figuring out the problems with the mechanics this early on is good.

    We must find a way to remedy these problems within the next few months while the building phase is in motion.

  5. #5
    As usual, good post Dubs.


    Vapid Demographics

  6. #6
    yeah if you could
    - track trade statistics between tribes (i see that being a pita to code)
    - restrict 'invuln' tribes from trading with 'warring' tribes...trading with a warring tribe flips their switch (of course this is worked around by throw away mule toons)

    of course the best fix is just not to having to worrying about fixing the possible exploits...because it's not in game
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    www.theburninghorde.com

  7. #7
    people that get two acconts have no life

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Sultan View Post
    people that get two acconts have no life
    i concur. but lots of people have no life
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    www.theburninghorde.com

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Dubanka View Post
    yeah if you could
    - track trade statistics between tribes (i see that being a pita to code)
    - restrict 'invuln' tribes from trading with 'warring' tribes...trading with a warring tribe flips their switch (of course this is worked around by throw away mule toons)

    of course the best fix is just not to having to worrying about fixing the possible exploits...because it's not in game
    A bitch to code and probably would really effect the server saves in some way.
    You could have every character include 1 more array of data that tracks individual player trade alignment. If you only track alignment while in a tribe, people will just exit to trade and then rejoin in a few hours.

  10. #10
    Dub, I agree that it's not perfect, and I still don't get Xsyon's insistence on mutalism for warfare, but I do think it's a good comprimise with other zones being opened up as non-safe. I honestly wouldn't mind him extending the safe zones to be some of the land between tribal zones when new, conquerable, areas open up.

    At least with the way it is now, players could stalk the crafting alts. That's what I see happening: People are going to mostly focus on cutting off the tribes supply by harrasing the workers (and I mean this like how it's done in an RTS; not as greifing), and they're going to need escorts or something. I really don't think it'll be too bad.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •