Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Everything about Illarion that fits nowhere else. / Alles über Illarion was inhaltlich in kein anderes Board passt.

Moderator: Gamemasters

Post Reply
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Dear Illarionites,

a game like Illarion lives from the creativity and dedication of its players and their interaction. Illarion is not the game with flashy 3D graphics or tons of automated quests nor does stacking of gold coins or experience points promise any significant reward. Hence, one of the most important aspects is that players are involved in the daily events of Illarion, the storylines and quests. To strengthen this point, we already implemented certain measures, but all in all, Illarion is a rather static game where your individual actions only count when a gamemaster gives them an impact.

From my point of view, we have to regard two types of players: Casual players that log in once or twice a week for an hour or two and also those Illarion addicts that spend twenty or more hours a week, playing. So we also need two sets of measures to involve players, one on a permanent base and one on a event/action base.

We already made players play a more important role in town governments recently and also, the GMs involve players in building projects and similar large scale events. But we need more, maybe even semi-automated features that involve players and make them shape the land Illarion. Sandboxing is a buzzword, something every game wants to offer, but the definition of sandboxing as removal of any guidance resulted in many bad games coming out in the past.

I want you to brainstorm together with me what we can do to improve "sandboxing" and mainly player involvement. Give your points, your ideas and your opinions. As usual for a brainstorming, it is much more helpful to give your points rather than criticising the points of others without providing alternatives.

From my point of view, we should consider the following features to improve the game beyond "kill 10 wolves" quests and chatting at a campfire about it:
  • Ingame mail system
    It was requested various times in the past to have an ingame mail service, such as doves or letter boxes. Meanwhile, we might have the technical possibility to implement this by so called script variables that get saved in the database. These letters could basically replace the PMs of the forum as main way of indirect communication between characters. So you'd have to log in to send and receive messages from characters and also, could receive important messages about quests or political events from the GMs. As of now, such letters might not have a high priority because the forum works as substitute; but in the long run, the more reasons you have to log in, the better!
  • Polls and elections ingame
    Back when the Troll's Bane Governors were elected ingame by the use of pedestals, we all saw the potential of such events to involve players. I can imagine having polls and general decisions within one faction also run by such "pedestals". So players could get involved in important decisions even if they are not around 24/7. As the faction membership and rank are known to the game, no abuse is envisioned.
  • Tax decisions
    Similar to the polls above, we could introduce a method that the way how taxes are used lies in the hands of the players. More gems? Infrastructure? Guards? Buildings? YOUR decision. I can imagine that this might be a tricky task because of the unclear balance between e.g. hiring guards and gem output but with proper planning, this could be a very good feature to involve players in daily decisions.
  • Sandboxing - Housing within a faction
    Clearly on our list, we want to provide the option to build your own house within your home faction. This shall work in an automated way so that you do not have to rely on your local gamemaster but can shape the world yourself. In theory, housing is pretty simple and most tools we need are ready. However, we lack a clear "price list" for houses and also, dedicated space for the houses. Mappers and
  • Sandboxing - Outside a faction
    Same as above - we plan that dedicated areas outside the factions shall be available for individual housing. As such houses could harm the factions, we might apply some restrictions on the number and places.
  • Sandboxing - Open new lands
    When Lennier designed the first draft for our new map, he clearly designed it in a way that it can be expanded. When player numbers approach a certain level, we can easily open new lands to the players to explore - and conquer. Our original three factions could act as baseline, as places of general services and as seeds. But players would be free to found new settlements, be it as colony or independent towns, in the new lands. Even if such settlements would never have the rank of a faction in terms of technical support, I am sure that players would enjoy this. With some reasonable methods, we could have decay of deserted settlements and also, who knows, maybe you can also conquer settlements of others? Or destroy them?
  • Large scale dynamic events
    Also planned, we might one day have a framework of dynamically generated events that just happen without anyone triggering them. An ambush on the road or a fire somewhere on low scale - or big show sieges, invasions or trade events on a large scale. Players would never know what is going to happen today but they would know - something is going to happen every day.
Now it is up to you to give us developers your opinion and wishes! Write a wishing list for 2015 and shape the future of this game!

Estralis
User avatar
Jupiter
Developer
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 11:23 am

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Jupiter »

I will play negative Nancy and say only something I don't like.
Estralis Seborian wrote: [*]Polls and elections ingame
Characters can arrange that themselves. If we implement a tool for that, we push polls elections as a political institution (enabling a feature implies the expectatio that it is used). I don't like this. We have sometimes too much "modern thinking" ingame for my taste, I don't see adding more deomcratic elements enginse wise as helpful in this regard.
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

Polls/Elections in game expanded
I'm going to counter Jupiter's dislike of that feature with the argument that some players can't be online during the faction meetings. I personally work every weekend and can't participate in any weekend events. Guess when all the Cadomyr royal audiences take place? A mechanism for players to have a voice even though they can't be online at the precisely right moment would be welcome in my opinion. I'd even like to see this idea expanded to an in game suggestion box for each faction so that everyone's convenience is considered - player and staff alike.

Encourage player run quests
I know I've mentioned this in a couple other threads, but the idea bears repeating so I'm going to post it again. A system of quest points designed for handing out tangible rewards to players who participate in and - more importantly - organize quests would likely stimulate player interaction. The way I imagine it, players hosting a roleplay event would get a quest point reward for the event plus additional points for each player that joins the event. The players joining the event would each also get a lesser quest point reward for their participation. Once a player reaches certain quest point benchmarks (similar to the rock finding explorers quest) a pop up would come up allowing them to choose from among some nice rewards. This could be implemented immediately on the honor system with forum posts by the event leader listing all the players in attendance and the rewards handed out manually. The work of automating it could come later if it seems like a good idea after a trial period.

Fewer forced features
I'm no fan of the random automated events. I didn't like being ambushed on the Galmair bridge. I didn't like the cursed shield. I also don't care for the force RP auto emotes. I mean for example, who's to say that I'm really in awe of Cadomyr? Those kinds of messages rub me wrong every time. I personally think that's not the right direction to take. If time and talent is going to be spent on developing something, it should be to stimulate interaction rather than to inflict automated difficulties on players who ultimately are given no choice and no reward.

Housing
This is a huge one. Everyone wants this and the new players seem to expect it. The flats are inadequate. It's very awkward to go to someone's apartment for a chat in their bedroom. One of the luxury villas in Cadomyr is a single room structure with just a bedroom inside. The housing should be customizable and offer at least two rooms on the low end with more on the higher end.

Cleaner chat log
There's too much spam in the chat. I have personally missed player remarks because I had to tune out the chat spam. Tone down the NPCs and get rid of the PvP auto-emotes.

Safe Passage
I'd like to see a no-monster zone on roads in the wilderness. I'd also like to return to the days of monster-free resource gathering but I suspect I'm in the minority on that.

Guilds
I know the guild system had mixed success in the old client but it was a way for players to have some impact in the game world. I'd like to see this feature return.

Forums
Historically, Illarion forums have been stiff and restrictive. There's really not much activity or much of interest on them. Other games I play have lively forums. Players don't always agree and it sometimes gets hot and even shocking in comparison to Illarion's cool detachment, but it's way more fun and interesting. I check those forums a lot. Illarion's ... not so much. Maybe it's time to loosen things up a little.

Those are the ideas off the top of my head.
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Thanks for the input! Good job! One question:
Guilds
I know the guild system had mixed success in the old client but it was a way for players to have some impact in the game world. I'd like to see this feature return.
What guild system?
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

Estralis Seborian wrote:Thanks for the input! Good job! One question:
Guilds
I know the guild system had mixed success in the old client but it was a way for players to have some impact in the game world. I'd like to see this feature return.
What guild system?

I have to confess, this made me laugh a little. :lol: Am I really the only person who remembers this?

Before the VBU we had guilds. There was a separate guild forum and some players had a premium self-moderated forum they used for their guilds with access granted only to guild members. I can still see one of those premium guild forums if I log on with the right account. Guilds were difficult to get going because you needed a minimum of four players and they had to be approved. With enough members and enough resources, guilds could have guild buildings and a dedicated guild depot. Mostly they went inactive and they probably would again, but for a short time it lights a fire under a couple of players which is the ultimate goal.

Guilds might not be strictly keeping with the VBU faction concept but I see no harm in players from different factions getting together to sew quilts or whatever since getting players more involved is the plan. The overall concept might need updating but it would give players something to get excited about.
User avatar
Djironnyma
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Djironnyma »

Kamilar wrote:Before the VBU we had guilds. There was a separate guild forum and some players had a premium self-moderated forum they used for their guilds with access granted only to guild members. I can still see one of those premium guild forums if I log on with the right account.
That hasnt to do with a guild system but is an benefit for beeing a Support Member of the Illarion Society. This havent change, see here: http://illarion.org/community/us_society.php
Kamilar wrote:Guilds were difficult to get going because you needed a minimum of four players and they had to be approved. With enough members and enough resources, guilds could have guild buildings and a dedicated guild depot.
That wasnt a guild system neigther but part of the building rules to avoid that single persons are able to build
Kamilar wrote:Guilds might not be strictly keeping with the VBU faction concept but I see no harm in players from different factions getting together to sew quilts or whatever since getting players more involved is the plan. The overall concept might need updating but it would give players something to get excited about.
Theres nothing what hinder you to found such guild. We have already different guilds. Indeed to found a guild for members of different factions wouldnt be easy, but as far as i rember we hadnt also in the old client no succsefull guild with a notable number of members from different towns.
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Pretty funny what ppl consider a "system"... As per Dji, nothing prevents founding of guilds. I think we can keep the point "enhanced guild support" especially wrt housing. Perhaps we can also have those ordinary guild tags in a player look at.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

The lack of guilds and player motivation is mostly due in my opinion to how the current factions work.

Before we had rather dynamic but devoted guilds for certain things, like town guards, magistrates etc. And also players didnt feel they absolutly needed to be part of certain towns because it was possible to completly sustain themselves in the wilderness. Granted some of these guilds did not last long and players felt some sort of way if someone else took control while they were busy irl for a month, but the fluidity and possibility was what drew players in.

Now we have a gem giveaway system that makes players feel that they must choose one of the factions even if that faction doesnt fit their rp. And gm leaders do not often support many guilds, because its not in their character's interest. Cults cannot survive in the wild like on gobaith, bandits are non existant due to no pk rewards and because very few players want to rp that, due to the absence of these guilds theres no motivation to make counters. Crafter guilds dont exist anymore for some elusive reason that I cannot fathom, because right now illarion is the safest place ever.

We've made illarion a stagnant boring game and its been in a downward spiral for quite some time. There has been considerable advancements that are not to be ignored however I've seen about two fellow roleplayers quit because they say ita boring and theres no ingame strife, and because of the out of character fiascos which all too many good roleplayers have fallen prey to. Its not just the developers and gms who are to blame, not at all in fact. They've tried very hard and spent much time trying to make illarion fun, but as players we also need to take responsibility for not making illarion interesting and being open to everyones roleplay.

I really don't understand why we have deviated so much from how the gobaith sandboxing worked, from the fighting system to the the dynamic strife that client, i feel the current one pales in comparison. Illarion also pushed the idea that your char can do almost anything now they feel as if they can do nothing.

My suggestion is to hold polls to see what needs changed, hold alot of polls do alot of brainstorming because we may be in a dangerous spot here on illarion because we may be on a downward spiral to a stagnant lifeless game, and none of us wants that at all.

Ps im just a player, i just want to roleplay and have fun like i used to.
User avatar
Velisai
Posts: 338
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: where pigs can fly

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Velisai »

Sandboxing isn't such a difficult or problematic concept in my mind. It simply means freedom. As much of it as possible. It does NOT mean that guidance must not be offered. I'm certain that there are many players who want and enjoy it. However, that guidance should be a true option, not something you may choose to ignore if you're not interested in half the game's features (crafting, magic gems, repair, etc.). This means allowing non-GM-run settlements to rise and fall and coexist with those GM-char-guided factions we have now.

If some char wants to live in the wilderness as a hermit, let it happen. Let them build a hut. Back on Gobaith there was this witch house in the north woods. I never met the witch with any of my chars, but I very much enjoyed researching the house's origins by asking actual players about it (not reading a diary page, which is the most overused way to give history lessons in RPGs) and finding the secret one-way-emergency-exit-teleport-thing in the basement. Of course not all information about that house was easily or at all available, but that only made it more mysterious and interesting. You could just stand there in game for a while and wonder what things might have happened there. Over time, that abandoned house decayed and finally was demolished by another player, leaving only a nice, small cave behind where the basement was. This was an awesome thing to simply watch and I imagine even more satisfying to play a part in. All of it made sense too, which helps create an immersive, believable world. Without knowing many details, you can very well imagine why a witch would choose to live far from the settlements, why she might have needed an emergency exit, why it was a magical one and not a tunnel and also why a druid would want to tear the whole thing down. It wasn't anything too fancy or over the top either.

This example shows very nicely how players used to create good lore and had fun doing it, as opposed to the current state where players must sit down out of game to write something up that possibly doesn't even really interest them, get it approved, etc if they want to enrich the game history. It has become a chore. It also shows that housing doesn't have to be separated from the actual game world or OOCly restricted to some designated area.

If you are worried about too many houses and settlements being built and abandoned, make it an expensive long term goal and allow destruction and conquest of unused stuff. Even if a player wants to build his private home next to a dragon lair, allow them to begin and spawn a few dragons on their arse. That will teach them to pick a better place next time, all IC. Sure, some players will feel unfairly treated, but I've seen other RPGs devolve into boredom because their GMs didn't have the spine to fulfill their purpose. You get a money sink players are happy to have and a nice source of IC conflict. For additional moneysinking and discouraging the building of private palaces all over, introduce a maintainance cost. If it isn't paid, the building should start to decay. All this is of course not that easy to balance, but the same can be said about every single truly interesting set of features. Fighting and magic will pose much greater balance issues, but nobody ever considered dropping magic for good because of it, did they?

For all of this to happen some day, the magic gem system would have to be reworked or scrapped. Personally I don't see a problem with that, since the current one is detrimental to the game on so many levels that we are better off without it. I'd even go as far as proposing to scrapping it right now and pushing the reintroduction to the very end of the to do list.

Another aspect of sandbox play would be armors and weapons. Forget about levels and make every item have their distinct strengths and weaknesses. Give a choice, instead of just another ladder to climb. Make the increased damage of magical weapons (or whatever other effects they may get in the future) depend on attributes like essence and willpower and you create a whole range of viable fighter builds with a seamless transition into the mage/priest/alchemist classes.
Ragorn
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Ragorn »

Here are some links to brainstorming in general:
(DE) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainstorming
(EN) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainstorming

Some imho important points are: no discussions, no critizism, welcome unusual ideas, etc.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

Again i agree with vel, throw out more freedoms and interesting things begin to happen.

Completly redo gems

Fighting system needs a change perhaps before or after the magic system gets put into place. (Ever think of a complete rollback? The old one had it's flaws but it was still 100x better than what we currently have, why not try building from there instead of breaking what didnt need a.complete rework?)

Get rid of auto ban npcs and other things that would limit strife, let it happen, once players stop feeling safe all the time they'll start banding together in guilds.

Provide a challenge, we've been catering to casual players so much that elements, magic items, high level equipment etc etc are common and ridiculously easy to come by.
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

Djironnyma wrote:Theres nothing what hinder you to found such guild. We have already different guilds. Indeed to found a guild for members of different factions wouldnt be easy, but as far as i rember we hadnt also in the old client no succsefull guild with a notable number of members from different towns.
There are lots of hindrances. The guild forum is gone. I can see the guild forum header when I log in but all the content is missing except for that one premium forum that I can still see. That leaves us with one forum for non-faction RP. I'd call that a hindrance. Also a hindrance is the faction system where you need approval of your faction leader to start up a group which then gets denied. In order to pull a group together, you have to be in the wilderness. Lots of hindrances there.

The guilds weren't wildly successful in the past but so what? They got players interested in playing the game and right now we need that.

@ Djironnyma: We're brainstorming so I'm going to gloss over all the obnoxious criticism in the interest of the game but I will say it was not useful input and ask that you try and stay on topic. The topic is ideas. I'm still waiting to read yours.
Estralis wrote:As usual for a brainstorming, it is much more helpful to give your points rather than criticising the points of others without providing alternatives.
Estralis wrote:Pretty funny what ppl consider a "system"... As per Dji, nothing prevents founding of guilds.
Same @ Estralis. You asked for ideas. If you want them, suck it up.

I'm honestly questioning right now whether you guys are really sincere in your wish to generate player interest. I have enough ways to waste my time.
User avatar
Jupiter
Developer
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 11:23 am

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Jupiter »

Kamilar wrote:I'm honestly questioning right now whether you guys are really sincere in your wish to generate player interest.
Of course, we do! :P

Don't take critique personally. Your ideas are welcomed and apperciated. But that also means that they are going to be reviewed and answered and maybe questioned. That means nothing else but that we value your feedback. If this wasn't the case, they would be simply ignored.

With that we all should go back to being friends. ;)
User avatar
nathi
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by nathi »

Estralis Seborian wrote:Thanks for the input! Good job! One question:
Guilds
I know the guild system had mixed success in the old client but it was a way for players to have some impact in the game world. I'd like to see this feature return.
What guild system?

This one…. http://illarion.org/community/forums/vi ... =1&t=38308

lg nathi
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

Jupiter wrote:
Kamilar wrote:I'm honestly questioning right now whether you guys are really sincere in your wish to generate player interest.
Of course, we do! :P

Don't take critique personally. Your ideas are welcomed and apperciated. But that also means that they are going to be reviewed and answered and maybe questioned. That means nothing else but that we value your feedback. If this wasn't the case, they would be simply ignored.

With that we all should go back to being friends. ;)

My understanding of brainstorming is that you put all ideas on the table and keep them coming. Analyzing comes later. If there's an idea that needs closer discussion, it would probably be more productive to split it off into another thread because criticism during brainstorming only stifles the flow of ideas.

I have no problem with constructive criticism, but this isn't the time or place for it. This much criticism on the first page of a thread titled "Open Brainstorming" does not say good things about creativity here. That might be something else to take a closer look at where player involvement is concerned.
User avatar
Lord Arcia
Posts: 912
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:52 am
Location: Tol Vanima
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Lord Arcia »

Velisai wrote: Another aspect of sandbox play would be armors and weapons. Forget about levels and make every item have their distinct strengths and weaknesses. Give a choice, instead of just another ladder to climb. Make the increased damage of magical weapons (or whatever other effects they may get in the future) depend on attributes like essence and willpower and you create a whole range of viable fighter builds with a seamless transition into the mage/priest/alchemist classes.
Everybody uses the same armor. Same 2-3 weapons. I miss seeing end-game chars walking around with rapiers or just normal ol' daggers.

I know that this is harder to balance, but currently if players want to keep their chars competitive they have to jump on the lvl 100 weapons bandwagon. Removing options from characters is NEVER good.
User avatar
Vern Kron
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Vern Kron »

Many of the issues with player involvement is hampered somewhat by the holidays, but here is a couple of thoughts in general:

Instead of using available space IG for housing that, honestly, may look pretty bad, why not set it up so that when you enter a 'housing portal' it takes you to a cities housing 'area'. This can be set up for a person specifically, or just a wide area for people to mess around in. That way it doesn't necessarily deter for the regular playing field, but will also allow growth and development for players.

I think generally cities should not be static either, but that the ability to change and build onto a city be in some parts supervised by a GM, but at the same point able to be clearly communicated to the players. So, when a building plan is created, it is submitted onto the forum, so that people can work towards it. Perhaps a separate box is set up for collection purposes, and some way to review it to see who has deposited what (for reimbursement purposes).

We also need to be comfortable allowing conflict to build. Under the CURRENT lore, there is plenty of reason for there to be conflict. There is also a VERY significant quest that is hinted at, but (afaik) is not actually being played out. This being the quest of the hidden diamond.

The IG mail system would be great, but we should not rule out the forums purposes either.

Our weapons system is currently in a tiered rock-paper-scissors set up. This is not terrible, but we could add some more end-game variety to weapon choices, as well as some specific stats that would make each in a way viable against the other.

The old gem system was pretty neat, and if you corresponded the gems to the town's general needs (cadomyr gets things that effect attack, galmair gets dex and con stuff, runewick gets magic ones (even though the system doesn't exist)).

Make a second death system: One against NPC's, one against players. Player kills are more severe.


All of that said: I think we need the magic system before anything else. Illarion can't really count as a 'magical fantasy world'. Every passing day that Illarion doesn't have a magic system, is a missed opportunity to appeal to a person who wants to play a mage character. And I get it: "a good rp'er doesn't need the actual system". I am not saying that it is the end all, be all, fix of the year for the game, but it would definitely help, and add some serious variety to the game.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

Get rid of town craft balancing, let players at an array of static tools, all too often i see people quite towns that promote their kind of rp for another town just for the crafts, again stop limiting players. I know the goal was to not make towns completly independent but with the gem system and the crafting the towns are utterly dependant on each other to the point that their will never be large scale conflict between them because the towns need each other waay too much.

The npcs with favored crafts does not need to be changed it makes sense and works well with trade between towns.
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

I both agree and disagree with Mephistopheles.

Agree:
Splitting crafts between the towns didn't work in the old client. I'm not sure why the concept was revived, but things that failed in the past are best left in the past. Making the game a hassle to play is not the best strategy. If the goal is strife between factions, making them dependent on one another is going to prevent it. If the goal is to have everyone get along, making the towns independent from each other won't hurt.

Disagree:
We need more mid level dungeons with nice rewards, not less.

The fighting system really can't be challenging to a small handful of uber fighters and still be enjoyable to the mass of average and lesser fighters. We proved that again and again in the old system. Adding a few boss monsters in a separate location is preferable to making the dungeons too hard for casual players like what happened with the spider pit. Before the change to the spider pit, that was a good spot to go if there was no one around and often you would find others there and some fun RP could unexpectedly spark. Now there's no point in going there at all for a lot of us and that leaves little point in logging in if the online list is scanty. Taking away the reason for casual players to log in is probably not in the best interest of the game.

Some concessions could be made to the small group of uber fighters to keep them interested. Maybe special uber quests just for them or some RP tasks to get them out of the dungeons and interacting with lesser players in game. Something like Head-Up-A-Guild-Of-Super-Fighters-And-A-Dozen-Dragons-Will-Be-Spawned-Just-For-You as an example. Or again, quest points. They could head up player quests for trips to the uber spots and receive rewards for that. Anything but shifting the whole fighting system beyond the reach of most players.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

@Kamilar

I'm suggesting a rollback on fighting period, loot and dungeons are a part of that. There were plenty of dungeons in the old client that people went to fight and gather resources. For instance the graveyard not far from trollsbane. One huge difference is the fact that magic weapons are commonplace and the only real way to get the job done. Before at mid level with decent equipment you could gather coins and entrails and that meant something. This current fighting systems ruins the economy and ruins alot of fun. Remember how satisfying it was to have some magical equipment? Now nobody cares.

The reason people are so mad about the spider dungeon being too difficult now is not because it was a spot for rp but because it was a spot where the spoiled people could get ridiculously easy gold and skills. Granted this isnt everyone's reasons but its what most are pissed about. Yes we need mid level dungeons, but not only that we need a complete rework of the fighting system period.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

Highlights on my suggestions for change in the fighting system

Equipment needs individual strengths and weaknesses like before, get rid of the trifecta let people specialise in the armor and weapon of their choice to fit their rp instead of having to pg everything just to be competitive, its dumb and unrealistic.

Monsters need individual strengths and weaknesses

Loot needs redone completly

Rollback sincerely

If this cannot be done first my suggestion to the dev team is to carefully plan everything in advance so that magic, alchemy, and crafting all work appropriately together. Brainstorm and plan first, then decide what to do then begin scripting. Please dont script first and think later, that will only lead us further into this hole.
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Brief reminder: This is about how to get players involved into the game. All input is valuable, though.
User avatar
Salathe
Posts: 1741
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:42 am
Location: the magical land of narnia!
Contact:

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Salathe »

Lord Arcia wrote:Everybody uses the same armor. Same 2-3 weapons. I miss seeing end-game chars walking around with rapiers or just normal ol' daggers.

I know that this is harder to balance, but currently if players want to keep their chars competitive they have to jump on the lvl 100 weapons bandwagon. Removing options from characters is NEVER good.
For the history of Illarion, there was ALWAYS a definitive best to worst scale of items across all weapon and armor types. There was ALWAYS one best weapon, one best helmet, one best chest piece, etc. Whether or not many players realized it, understood it, or figured it out, it was always there. Any beliefs that a unique or creative combination of gear deviating from the best in slot, made you different, comparable, or better than others, was a delusion supported by the smoke and mirrors from lack of info. Before gear was balanced by levels, there was a definitively best weapon (among all weapon classes) and for each armor class, there was a best set of armor. Certain armor classes did not have as good of stats in the best set of opposing classes. Armor class 1's best set of gear would have noticably less relative defensive stats than armor class 2. The game was horribly imbalanced, period.

This is actually the first time in the history of the game, that we actually see a balance among different weapon types, and that players can change out certain lvl 100 weapons or a different lvl 100 weapon of the same class without losing any competitive edge. I know this choice is down to 2 weapons in some instances, but it's more than was available in the past.

There was a pretty cool project I had worked on that I truly believe wouldve solved this issue as well a number of related issues and created alot of long term interest for players. But since I've completed what I can and have no time nor programming capabilities, it has since been halted until a dev decides to pick it up and implement in. I'll take some time here for a plug and ask interested devs to dig up "Project: Artifacts" on Mantis (issue ID 9876) and finish our hard work =). It's something I truly believe would get all players, including new players, hooked onto the combat side of the game.

That being said, alot of people need to realize that a small number volunteers put in what they can of their personal time for this game. The VBU was going to be released with no combat of any kind supported. The combat system we have was put together in a day by Flux. Of course it needs to be improved. But we have to pick our battles for development. Combat was ridiculously imbalanced, and the current trifecta / gear level requirement was a realistic simple solution to cement balance which we knew could be implemented in timely manner. It certainly isn't the best solution. It does take away some fun, but big projects are difficult in a game like this. Suggestions are best to be very specific, avoid open ended and general statements like "Please think before implementing" or "This is dumb and unrealistic, add this!". If you are hoping for a big change, suggest it, but aren't able to give specifics, it won't happen unless you are putting in the time and effort to get it done. Illarion isn't run by a company, there's no profit, nothing like what we are all used to on other games, so don't treat the staff like you do Blizzard =)
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Kamilar »

Mephistopheles wrote:@Kamilar

I'm suggesting a rollback on fighting period, loot and dungeons are a part of that. There were plenty of dungeons in the old client that people went to fight and gather resources. For instance the graveyard not far from trollsbane. One huge difference is the fact that magic weapons are commonplace and the only real way to get the job done. Before at mid level with decent equipment you could gather coins and entrails and that meant something. This current fighting systems ruins the economy and ruins alot of fun. Remember how satisfying it was to have some magical equipment? Now nobody cares.

The reason people are so mad about the spider dungeon being too difficult now is not because it was a spot for rp but because it was a spot where the spoiled people could get ridiculously easy gold and skills. Granted this isnt everyone's reasons but its what most are pissed about. Yes we need mid level dungeons, but not only that we need a complete rework of the fighting system period.
I don't completely understand what you mean by rollback but if it means putting the spider den back the way it was before, you get a big YES! from me. It was a super fun spot before. I know there's another thread under proposals for this but it's worth bringing it here too. Players really enjoyed the spider den. Really, really, really. I don't see the point in preserving the purity of the concept if it isn't fun for players.

Making the game fun to play should be the top priority. Put the soulpains back the way they were and even put more of them in there. That's what the players enjoyed so make more dungeons like that. The focus should be on creating more fun for the people playing the game, not maintaining some rigid policy.
User avatar
Vern Kron
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Vern Kron »

If I had to make a Christmas Wish list for Illarion in the new year:

1. A housing 'dimension':
Each town has an open plane for it to build upon as player housing, that the players can alter. This area would be saved on updates, update would occur, and save applied ontop of it, so that with each update we don't find housing reset EVERY TIME, and allowing towns and individuals to really begin impacting an area.

2. Magic System implemented

3. The Lore
Adopting the old lore, and tailoring it to fit, with significant contribution to the players. IMO, it is extremely rude to all previous players of the game that the world that we knew and built on Gobaith suddenly just 'doesn't exist'. Meaning Salkamar, Gynk, etc etc all still remain within the lore. It may be a pain, but I fully believe that we have the ability to weave the old story directly into the lore of this world. For example, the entirety of this map could be on a different continent, thereby solving much of the issue we have faced before, and able to provide outside countries perhaps vying for each of the towns, and the towns act as colonies.

4. Choices!
Quests that bring about choices for a character, or a side, or a division, are BEAUTIFUL for a game like this. The best ones are where everyone has the same general goal, but different ideas on how to approach it, which fits with the current concept behind the town. For example: A pirate king has decided that he is going to take over the country side. After delivery a few threats, and thoroughly beating the living stuffing out of the warriors who would challenge him, the towns realize they must take a more creative route. Galmair wants to be sneaky and sabotage the pirate, Cadomyr has decided that the best bet is to unite and beat him together in a significant battle, and Runewick decides that they can collect certain magical things and perform a ritual, destroying large fleets of their army.

OR

Morally tricky quests, where perhaps a town is provided an 'edge' over the others, but in the end it actually is someone bad and they have been played all along or some such. Basically, causing conflict that can be dealt with in ways that do not EXACTLY rely DIRECTLY on a battle system.

5. Summoning creatures, or pets!

It is not useful. It is not important. But I would enjoy being able to have a pet.
User avatar
Vern Kron
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Vern Kron »

If I had to make a Christmas Wish list for Illarion in the new year:

1. A housing 'dimension':
Each town has an open plane for it to build upon as player housing, that the players can alter. This area would be saved on updates, update would occur, and save applied ontop of it, so that with each update we don't find housing reset EVERY TIME, and allowing towns and individuals to really begin impacting an area.

2. Magic System implemented

3. The Lore
Adopting the old lore, and tailoring it to fit, with significant contribution to the players. IMO, it is extremely rude to all previous players of the game that the world that we knew and built on Gobaith suddenly just 'doesn't exist'. Meaning Salkamar, Gynk, etc etc all still remain within the lore. It may be a pain, but I fully believe that we have the ability to weave the old story directly into the lore of this world. For example, the entirety of this map could be on a different continent, thereby solving much of the issue we have faced before, and able to provide outside countries perhaps vying for each of the towns, and the towns act as colonies.

4. Choices!
Quests that bring about choices for a character, or a side, or a division, are BEAUTIFUL for a game like this. The best ones are where everyone has the same general goal, but different ideas on how to approach it, which fits with the current concept behind the town. For example: A pirate king has decided that he is going to take over the country side. After delivery a few threats, and thoroughly beating the living stuffing out of the warriors who would challenge him, the towns realize they must take a more creative route. Galmair wants to be sneaky and sabotage the pirate, Cadomyr has decided that the best bet is to unite and beat him together in a significant battle, and Runewick decides that they can collect certain magical things and perform a ritual, destroying large fleets of their army.

OR

Morally tricky quests, where perhaps a town is provided an 'edge' over the others, but in the end it actually is someone bad and they have been played all along or some such. Basically, causing conflict that can be dealt with in ways that do not EXACTLY rely DIRECTLY on a battle system.

5. Summoning creatures, or pets!

It is not useful. It is not important. But I would enjoy being able to have a pet.
User avatar
Drathe
Official Illarion Banner Contest Winner
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2001 9:46 pm
Location: Climbing from a window

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Drathe »

Towns: Should be referenced and played to as settlements or outposts. They are not "cities" as they are often referred to and "towns" are stretching it too. Settlement/outposts fits the game, faction, player base size and rp/lore. It fits the lore as these little co-habitations fiercely guarded and fought over are where the gems are mined and hence why the people/factions are there. (Just a bug bear of mine)

Outlaw settlement: If there are going to be outlaws make it a little settlement and give them a place to live. Where the Inn is would be fine with the tools to work and live as outlaws. Outlaw simply being those who are out of the common law of the three factions.

Gems: Reintroduce magic diamonds for outlaws only. These are claimed not from taxes but from how much/many materials/loot is given to the settlement. As is the donation system in other towns.

Guilds: Outlaws love a guild a neautral place for all guilds what ever ruckas is going on with a faction.

Static Tools: All tools available in all towns and Outlaw inn/settlement. (yeh yeh, I know why its not like that but you cant have a tri faction conflict or much player antagonisation if you NEED to use/be in "that" place. It makes the game stagnant.

Factions: Factions need to start being directly GM driven to conflict periodically against each other (not ALL the time though). The whole point of the tri faction system with players being made to chose one side was to be a generic antagoniser to add to player/character, RP, story and interest. There is the potential now to have some great conflicts on scale (player numbers dependent). Death is no issue to the player as their character looses nothing of consequence. So lets have some faction/player fights . These conflicts political/physical will add loyalty/bonding to those of that team. Your faction is your home, your livelyhood your settlement folk. Else defect to another town.

Settlement/outpost Banning: Get rid off. Let players agro each other and sort it out. All I've found this achieves is to mute antagonisation and development of anything interesting for worry of getting NPC banned and then not being able to use said town tools or what not. It adds nothing other than static moments and takes a lot. For those who grief like some arsehole there is !GM. I am all for players in game 'banning' a character and fighting them, keeping them out. Just not that NPC.

GM leaders: This works for the most part, so lead us, push the players into glory for the faction. Press your factions dominance in the land, get players to raid other factions by small quest like a faction wagon train raid. Kidnap a GM played merchant/person of interest from another faction for questioning. Damage or break a faction tool, mine entrance. Town player run concilers are great but they dont hold the weight/sway of a GM/faction leader and their word. Lets get away from demon quest i.e the demon attack, demon gates, demon prince, demon posession, demon army, demon take over the world and lets get it on with the factions. RF online anyone?

Gem trade: Still able and essential, player can still do this, players are still allowed into other towns if the players let them. We here are a very soft and acceptable bunch of players on the whole. Go trade them at the outlaw zone.

Change of thought: I think we need to change the way we play/think of Illarion now. Its just not Gobiath days and ways. We need to embrace the new concept and that this gritty world and land is all about the gems, the mining them and the harsh life of it all. Safety is in your faction, join it and be it and live and fight for it. Its not Gobiath where you casually wash up from a ship wreck and hop scotch about like some memory forgone fool. Its all about the team.

That should either get player interaction as per the concept or push away the last 5 players.
Last edited by Drathe on Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open Brainstorming on Player Involvement

Post by Mephistopheles »

Thanks to Salathe for clearly explaining how the fighting has actually improved, fighting can always be improved but theres plenty of time for that to happen.

I agree completly with Drathe, but players themselves need to stand up as well. It can be hard especially when gms turn down entire guilds for reasons of their own, whatever they may be. Just try and put your neck out there and present a plot.

About gm driven quests, Drathe makes clear a point about the basis of way too many quests being about demons or crazy evil threats, it does get old. Still props for some of the roleplay I've seen in those quests, it was phenomenal and fun. But players like to see quests through and its difficult to take mass threats seriously when nothing happens for a year or more ig, while in the meantime other threats come about that also go unresolved. I loved the quests and so did many others but we should be a bit more dynamic with our quests and I'd like to see more player driven quests.
Post Reply