Combat Roles within Armageddon - Limited Choices, or is there?

[Barsook]

What we need is conflict/enemies before we reopen certain clans.

EDIT: That was dumb, wasn't it?

[whitt]

That said: can't the people getting shot at just run away?

I know this is a derail and I'll apologize in advance - but, oh do I loathe the archery code.

So with that disclaimer.  The answer to this question? Is almost without exception.  No.

So let's say you're out and about doing your thing.  Your brain is wrapped up in skinning a kill, waying your buddy, chatting with your hunting partner.  In short, you the player are thinking about anything but insta-fleeing some guy on a beetle with a .50 caliber sniper rifle.

Mid skinning attempt or, if they're very clever, just as you start fighting a critter.  An arrow flies in from the west and strikes your PC in the head.

By the time your brain processes that you've just been shot for > 50% of your hp, the archer has already reloaded and is firing again.  A second shot to the head and you are dead.  That's 75% of interaction with "Raiders" with bows.

The next 20% of the time?  That first arrow had Perraine or Heramide.

So yeah, barring the two above situations?  The right response is spam enter move commands until you're back inside the nearest quitsafe place (which is not the right RP response).  Unfortunately?  The folks with the bow are probably watching you before they start shooting, waiting until you are dismounted so you can't run (End) to the nearest safeplace, and then just... shoot you again, while you try to bandage.

Oh... or you make it, this time.  And they bring two archers the next time - as mentioned.  Archery code is dumb - Riev isn't wrong.

[Riev]

Byn/Arm/Legions/Militaristic clans end up being boring without conflict. And they aren't (to me) DESIGNED to be the PC-to-PC conflict resolution. They're the clans you roll up into because staff are going to load up a scenario that ISN'T a PC conflict that you have to try and resolve.

That's how I've always seen it, even when that certainly is NOT how it happens. You want PC conflict resolution? Join a Merchant House, or the Guild. You want to defend against a horde of gith? You better be in the Byn or the Arm because nobody wants a Kadian Hunter on the front lines.

The move away from staff-sponsored plots killed the militaristic/combative role in the game. I hate to be so blunt, but that's exactly what it did. PCs rarely get the Arm of the Dragon involved in their petty squabbles, and even if they do it doesn't make much sense in the gameworld FOR them to.

[Jingo]

I tend to think as "combat roles" as a sphere more than a collections roles. The game has three to four spheres that overlap, Social, Combat, Magick and possibly Criminal. Players that leave the city (including entering the labyrinth) will be expected to fight or avoid fighting something at some point. Wilderness play is always going to be combat oriented.

Assassins are kind of a hybrid between Social, Combat and Criminal. I think the combat grind has the worst effect on them. Partly because the binary test for a successful assassination requires such a high skill threshold and partly because until they can pass that test, they need to play the role of a subpar mercenary or hunter.

As far as finding a way to add new and different ways to enjoy combat in the game? Just think of what players can do while they're out and about in the wilderness. I can think of a metric assload of ideas. But they all require either additional code or staff support.

Scout Prospector: Scouts a location for raw materials that can be extracted.
Scout Outrider: Scouts out the movement and troop strength of Gith, Mantis, Tuluki Forces etc.
Caravan Guard: Guards Caravans
Privateer: Raids Caravans (different from "gimme your boots" raider)
Bounty Hunter: Brings criminals to justice from outside the gates. (Not just PC's)

[whitt]

Byn/Arm/Legions/Militaristic clans end up being boring without conflict. And they aren't (to me) DESIGNED to be the PC-to-PC conflict resolution. They're the clans you roll up into because staff are going to load up a scenario that ISN'T a PC conflict that you have to try and resolve.

That's how I've always seen it, even when that certainly is NOT how it happens. You want PC conflict resolution? Join a Merchant House, or the Guild. You want to defend against a horde of gith? You better be in the Byn or the Arm because nobody wants a Kadian Hunter on the front lines.

+1 to the above.  Without staff driven NPC heavy opposition the military clans stagnate.  When there is an NPC opponent (Gith, Raider plot, Spiders, Flying Spiders, Trouble in the sewers) these clans are a blast.

Beyond that I think the larger topic already mentioned is that there's no "enemy" to fight with Tuluk gone.  Kurac lost the motivation to keep the North Road clear with Tuluk closed.  The DEs never really had a strong opponent to the best of my knowledge (clear exception being the recent plotline).  Find a new focus for the three/four/five clans in play first.  That might be enough to fix the perceived issue.

[Refugee]

Re:  Gladiators

People don't want to put in the time to grind for death matches in the arena.  You get a lot of talk on the GDB about how we should do this, but when Borsail PCs try to hire gladiators for to-the-death fights it's proven very difficult.

I agree, open up the Wyverns.  The Borsail noble PCs' power has been hampered in game since they were closed.  Theoretically they remain very powerful, but in fact, how other actually powerful PCs react to them in game has changed a great deal because they have to pay to get anything done, instead of ordering it done.  And in reality, in this game money doesn't have the power it should have.

Borsail NPCs would think of things for the Wyverns to do, and Wyvern leaders could take their crews out hunting for training purposes.  They could also perform as gladiators and bloodball players.

[WithSprinkles]

I think everyone should get flee. Even if it's at different levels, people can turn tail and accurately make like a bastard for the horizon if they are being attacked. And if we're talking about balancing classes a bit, others can (and are) speaking on that with much more conviction, experience and authority, but I believe that everyone should have at least one weapon skill. Instead of one guild being, "I'm squishy and if you hit me, coins fall out."

Back fully to the topic though, I like Narf's idea of having the equivalent of "Red Shirts" that we can play temporarily to promote conflict. It would keep things fresh and you never knowing if that one chalton in that herd was going to try and face roll you.

I've been part of successful (and painfully, woefully unsuccessful) expeditions before. I kinda feel that it's about putting yourself out there and being open to possibilities, story lines and conflict. If you're bored, try not to be. If your character sees an issue that bugs them, have them do something about it. If you do, you'd be surprised how many people are willing to throw in their sword and their axe and their bow, etc.

As for what those up top can do (the GMs) .. open possibilities up for antagonism in game and let people run with them to their natural conclusions. If you start some political stuff with Tuluk, for example, that culminates in Nak picking up and marching in that direction, let us skirmish in the sands and use that "Red Shirt" proposal to fill out both sides of the conflict. If civil war starts to tear apart the city, enact martial law and curfews that are enforced by the AOD. See THAT situation explode. Rumors of PVE with increased spawn rates, artifact caches, treasure hunt rumors and exotic, dangerous beasts are a draw. Or an item uncovered that is a remnant of lost technology. A dangerous magic remnant that infuses the land with its effects and needs to be destroyed. Stuff like that.

[650Booger]

Instead of one guild being, "I'm squishy and if you hit me, coins fall out."

To be fair, everybody DOES codedly get combat skills, even if not a specific weapon skill.

[Ath]

So... conflict is needed.  I get that.  I've been mulling this one over in my head.  I do have to agree... if there is combat to be had, combat roles will be interesting.  There is going to be downtime for certain...  wars don't happen all the time, but conflict of an environmental nature can also happen.

[Barsook]

As in hunting, or what?

[650Booger]

Lets reopen Tuluk!  pleaseohplease?

it closed before I started playing and even -I- feel the loss of it.

[Miradus]

As in hunting, or what?

Rangers gonna range. Warriors gonna war. Burglars gonna burgle.

I like (as a warrior) fighting gith. It's more epic than killing gortok. I would be pretty pleased if there were more NPC humanoid mobs scattered about to kill. That doesn't really address the issue of "plots" but it's something.

[Barsook]

Lets reopen Tuluk!  pleaseohplease?
[Snip] -I- feel the loss of it.

[wizturbo]

Ath, I'll send you something via the request tool on this. 

The TLDR version for everyone mirrors a lot of other comments though:

1.  Combat roles don't really have a lot of combat in them.  The post about 1% vs. 99% is accurate, and should be.

2.  Fake combat, in the form of games, is the way that many societies have dealt with this problem while still maintaining a lot of fighting types.

3.  We should be focusing on fake combat as the place to fill the 99%, as everyone can still enjoy the 1% situations as they arise.

[Molten Heart]

Wrong thread

[Ath]

Ath, I'll send you something via the request tool on this. 

The TLDR version for everyone mirrors a lot of other comments though:

1.  Combat roles don't really have a lot of combat in them.  The post about 1% vs. 99% is accurate, and should be.

2.  Fake combat, in the form of games, is the way that many societies have dealt with this problem while still maintaining a lot of fighting types.

3.  We should be focusing on fake combat as the place to fill the 99%, as everyone can still enjoy the 1% situations as they arise.

Fake combat... like the Arena, but no one wants to risk their character in the arena.

[Riev]

Ath, I'll send you something via the request tool on this. 

The TLDR version for everyone mirrors a lot of other comments though:

1.  Combat roles don't really have a lot of combat in them.  The post about 1% vs. 99% is accurate, and should be.

2.  Fake combat, in the form of games, is the way that many societies have dealt with this problem while still maintaining a lot of fighting types.

3.  We should be focusing on fake combat as the place to fill the 99%, as everyone can still enjoy the 1% situations as they arise.

Fake combat... like the Arena, but no one wants to risk their character in the arena.

I think it may be a mistake for the Arena to be FATAL and bloody. The Arena can still be bloody, and gory, but not always end in death. That's for criminals. You can have a brutally good warrior fight, with neither side wanting to give in. Until one is downed and needs medics and a month of recuperation, or until their Borsail Master says "I'm done with that one" and okays the death.

Even if people DID want to risk their characters (because you BETTER have some sort of compensation beyond PC Noble #2522 is pleased), warrior on warrior combat is BORING. Parries and blocks like woah. And if it isn't two warriors, the warrior will probably win.

This is where games come in fun, but as an Arena WATCHER, sometimes its impossible to know whats going on outside of the announcer who has to be a fucking SportsCenter professional just to convey the action.

[Ath]

Tuluk is another conversation, maybe one we'll have in the future.  Trust me, it's on the minds of a lot of staff members also.  Tuluk at the moment though won't create stuff for Combat roles to do.

The issue with Wars and setting up things on the staff side is that typically...  we put in a lot of effort, for a very short period of return.  I had an idea though... this may seem kinda "Gamey" but, it's a concept.  What if a threat would present itself, let's say there is a Silt Horror mating season, and it's causing all sorts of havoc on Red Storm.  We create an object that will be 100% skin on Silt Horrors, said object is then just turned in, no reward for turning it in at this time.  We can track the turn ins.  The effort is that in period of time enough of these turn ins happen, a result happens.  Silt Horrors back down...  but if they don't get enough turn ins, they swarm the docks and Spice Sifters stop sifting, which then cuts into Kuraci supply and prices of Spice go up.

What if we did something where we didn't have to "control" every aspect of it... and rewards can still be giving out by staff for effort.  Call it more of an Automated Plot.  Kurac may see the problem and work to resolve it by hiring the Byn. Enterprising Indies might take it upon themselves to try to clear the issue.  All staff has to do is setup the NPC turn in point, setup spawns of Silt Horrors, maybe a bit of randomization, and then setup the Silt Horrors to have the turn in token.  We can control a lot of these aspects... so we can tweak as needed.

Would this be too gamey?  More MMORPG-ish, or do you think this could create a plot and activity for Combat Roles?

[Ath]

Ath, I'll send you something via the request tool on this. 

The TLDR version for everyone mirrors a lot of other comments though:

1.  Combat roles don't really have a lot of combat in them.  The post about 1% vs. 99% is accurate, and should be.

2.  Fake combat, in the form of games, is the way that many societies have dealt with this problem while still maintaining a lot of fighting types.

3.  We should be focusing on fake combat as the place to fill the 99%, as everyone can still enjoy the 1% situations as they arise.

Fake combat... like the Arena, but no one wants to risk their character in the arena.

I think it may be a mistake for the Arena to be FATAL and bloody. The Arena can still be bloody, and gory, but not always end in death. That's for criminals. You can have a brutally good warrior fight, with neither side wanting to give in. Until one is downed and needs medics and a month of recuperation, or until their Borsail Master says "I'm done with that one" and okays the death.

Even if people DID want to risk their characters (because you BETTER have some sort of compensation beyond PC Noble #2522 is pleased), warrior on warrior combat is BORING. Parries and blocks like woah. And if it isn't two warriors, the warrior will probably win.

This is where games come in fun, but as an Arena WATCHER, sometimes its impossible to know whats going on outside of the announcer who has to be a fucking SportsCenter professional just to convey the action.

What if we put in a coded item within the Arena to make it so that there is less risk of death?  Maybe the IC standpoint is that there are medics on hand to stop wounds, but there will still be a risk they fail.  Also, what if we had a way to slow combat in the arena down so that the spam wasn't so quick and it let people put in emotes easier?

[Miradus]

It's absolutely a good idea, but it's not specific to warriors. It's hunting on a different scale.

You could do the exact same thing with kryl coming out of the forest and attacking Morin's.

Are staff adverse to humanoid NPC's in some way that I'm not aware of? Because your idea of the silt horrors is similar to my idea of silt pirates.

[Ath]

It's absolutely a good idea, but it's not specific to warriors. It's hunting on a different scale.

You could do the exact same thing with kryl coming out of the forest and attacking Morin's.

Are staff adverse to humanoid NPC's in some way that I'm not aware of? Because your idea of the silt horrors is similar to my idea of silt pirates.

Not at all, it was just the first idea that came to mind.  The issue with humanoid NPCs that have the ability to under and speak back, staff likes being able to RP responses with.  Though I guess that could be done in other ways.  Also, it's not hunting really... as well, you're still killing a threat and the object to be skinned drops 100% of the time so anyone can get it.  Now if some entrepreneurial Indie group also worked on buying up all of that Silt Horror shell, and then say sold it all to Salarr, prices for Silt Horror armor could drop.  The idea is going to be cause and effect.  Kill too many Silt Horrors, then well...  we reduce their spawn rate.  Kill too few, they overrun areas.  No one kills any, maybe they start causing even worse issues.

[John]

The place to start is the ridiculous grind you have to go through just to achieve mediocrity as a warrior, and the despair-inducing death march to above-averageness.  I have 4 months in on this PC, and I've branched from one warrior skill.  I've been stuck at (advanced) on my primary weapon skill for like...2 months now.  It's absurd.

See, I think the attitude that you've spent 2 IC years and expect to have branched an advance weapon skill to be absurd. Then again, you admit to blatantly grinding your skills until you get to what you consider above mediocrity. So I guess 4 months of grinding would get boring. Of course, the easy solution of not grinding nonstop is available, but one I doubt you would go for.

The biggest problem I see is not having big bags, and the attitude you must be this skilled to do interesting things. Some of this game's most enjoyable moments come from being in way over your head. That happens less if people take the "must grind before playing my charactrr" attitude. I don't know how to fix that though, except to call people out when they propagate the idea.

If you want player run initiatives for raiding clans (or Magick error enemy clans) the game needs more quit rooms in the wilderness. They were removed to force people into the cities, which worked to a degree, but at the expense of power bases getting built up to be antagonists for city players.

[nauta]

Automation sounds like a lot more work, but I like the direction -- I don't really like the quest-reward part of it.  It feels too gamey and not enough story-telly.

You could do the silt horror thing with minimal work, though.  Just load up a few silt horrors now and then, drop a hint from an NPC to Kurac that these silt horrors are a problem, and voila.

Or a rantarri on the loose in the north.

I think the biggest 'problem' to work out would be to supply realistic motivations.  Take the gith war, for instance, or the gryzzak bugs.  There wasn't any motivation for others to come into the tablelands hunting the gith.  Or with the gryzzak, there wasn't much motivation to go out and kill them (that I saw) -- other than the motivation to kill something.

That said, I much prefer intelligent opponents.  Second, would be NPCs with cool scripts: the gith and the kryl come to mind.  Hunting in the Grey or travelling through the gith territories is always an exciting experience.  But, again, there's little motivation to do so.

[Riev]

I think the "Automated" quests aren't a terrible idea, especially since you could set them up in various parts of the world. Don't -tell- people its happened, just an extra NPC in Morin's that occasionally mutters about "those damn gortoks" and, on a discuss topics script, tells you he really wants their skulls (or whatever, etc).

Not only would it be a "quest" to find out who wants the item, but staff can kind of set it and forget it. Players will love it initially, then stop caring about them, then staff has a reason to say "You didn't cull the bull duskhorns during mating season, and now they're rampaging across the scrub, eating up all the plants, forcing gurth into hiding" etc.

[Molten Heart]

More gith and other bad guys to fight through when traveling would create a place for combat types. Also making wagons more vulnerable to NPCs and PC raiders so they require some form of protection when they encounter these kinds of threats. Also, create reasons to travel and ways for combat types to be involved.