Planar Raiding

by Estarra

Back to Common Grounds.

Malarious2012-03-01 03:13:23
Oh yes I have some thoughts to throw into the hat........

Unproductive thoughts:
- The need for new mechanics seems overreaching.
- The lockout idea is just plain flawed because of things like missteps, needing to get others, etc.

Productive Raid thoughts:
- The goal should be to stop kick and run raids or very long raids. This can be done much more simply.

  1. To stop kick and run raids make people not have any reason to. Do not make every mob call for help, introduce a set number of planar guards. They show up when you attack something, they prevent leaving while present and are decently strong (preferably stagger attacks). If you die holding a corpse it resses and can be called again. Something like that, its new, its shiney, it can hard smack people if done right.
  2. Make discretionaries weaker. Right now ripple and liveforest are far too powerful. Weaken the base versions and create "empowered" versions that ALWAYS cost 1000 without construct or the different from having construct (that is if your power is 400, it costs 600 to activate).
  3. All cosmic mobs should cost power since they do not need to be created, continuum and vortex mainly.
  4. All cosmic mobs should have their strength be inverse to their power lost. If a mob is worth 1p it should be weak. if its worth 5 it should hurt.
  5. The shrine thing sounds fine.
  6. Make a system to handle "raid winning" if it is needed. For each different person who enters the area who is enemied an amount is added to the needed amount. You gain a set amount for being there based on how many people are there (min 3). Each time you kill a defender you gain a small boost, this way if you are wiping people out it means raid is over sooner. Each time a raider dies the defenders get a bonus, if the "required amount" is hit by defenders the plane begins to repel all enemies. If slain you cant return, but it will not insta boot you.

  7. It should be easier for defenders to hit the score if they are winning than for the raiders. The Raiders get a passive tic, but this also discourages defenders from taking as long as rewards them for every kill more quickly. Perhaps have the score for defenders killing something be based on level, and for raiders its say 1/6th of killing a demigod. I have no idea on specifics.



    As to the dharma and greg err ymen thing. So far I have heard what sounds like wildnodes mixed with domoths that can be used to BUY BUFFS or advantages in some way. As it is power gaining rates have gone up while making powers free. Most things that used to be limited are made easier or more available. This is called POWER CREEP when things have to keep getting better and better. You can have changes without making everything constantly growing stronger.

    Sorry if that all sounded fierce, but so far the direction of Lusternia has been catered to making things easier, giving more perks, etc. You can already stack so many buffs anything further is just a bad idea. We have lost conflict quests, made raiding considerably harder in several ways, and have a dying credit market so far... what else will we see?

    tl;dr
    * Read if you want to know.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not going to proofread this, but the idea is simple enough.
Enyalida2012-03-01 03:32:29
Malarious:


As to the dharma and greg err ymen thing. So far I have heard what sounds like wildnodes mixed with domoths that can be used to BUY BUFFS or advantages in some way. As it is power gaining rates have gone up while making powers free. Most things that used to be limited are made easier or more available. This is called POWER CREEP when things have to keep getting better and better. You can have changes without making everything constantly growing stronger.

Sorry if that all sounded fierce, but so far the direction of Lusternia has been catered to making things easier, giving more perks, etc. You can already stack so many buffs anything further is just a bad idea. We have lost conflict quests, made raiding considerably harder in several ways, and have a dying credit market so far... what else will we see?



Just going to comment on this. Specifically the things we're asking for are utility abilities and upgrades to civic structures. Also, that's not really what 'power creep' means anyways. Illums being released was power creep.
Raeri2012-03-01 04:40:09
rika:

They're not going to start showing any just because you made their raids worth their time.


^ Remember the original Conquest pool and the non-stop village raids? Yeah.
Sylphas2012-03-01 04:52:41
Xenthos:

I feel like blue moons happen much more often than smob raids.


Blue moons happen once a year, so divide the number of years Lusternia's been around by the number of smob raids. I think blue moons are rarer, but I don't have hard numbers.
Unknown2012-03-01 04:57:34
Sylphas:

Blue moons happen once a year, so divide the number of years Lusternia's been around by the number of smob raids. I think blue moons are rarer, but I don't have hard numbers.

Actually, 2-3 years.
Unknown2012-03-01 08:15:26
@ Shuyin's idea:

1) I feel like "kill x number of players in y range of time" will kind of make raiding only for the super-buff and super-tanks, and discourage eager-beaver newbies. How about a threshold based on amount of essence x person is worth (kind of like offering corpses at shrines, except without buffs like godrealm size, etc.).

2) Lockout of an area during z time is going to be a bit off for the 'offpeak players' (hi, Asia-Pacific Australia-Oceania), but eh.
Raeri2012-03-01 08:46:45

@ Shuyin's idea:

1) I feel like "kill x number of players in y range of time" will kind of make raiding only for the super-buff and super-tanks, and discourage eager-beaver newbies. How about a threshold based on amount of essence x person is worth (kind of like offering corpses at shrines, except without buffs like godrealm size, etc.).

Sadly, it's not like demis are worth anything compared to lv90-99 people :/
It'd need some adjusting so the numbers aren't quite so wonky.
Ssaliss2012-03-01 08:55:03
You could base it on might. That way, an entry-level fighter isn't worth nearly as much as a top-tier fighter.
Unknown2012-03-01 09:23:37
^ That works too!
Saran2012-03-01 11:17:47
Sojiro:

Just as a review, here's my idea to balance out planar conflict:


1. Do the lockout idea, but have it start once the raider initiates something offensive.
2. Add win conditions for both raiders/defenders that will lock out the area from being further attacked for x time.
3. Downgrade shrines so their effect isn't so overwhelming
4. Review the costs of dying in enemy territory because of the improvements to defense.

Now, for an idea for the win condition, which revolves around Estarra's dharma idea:

Raiders:
-Org territories will now be infused with dharma.
-Raiders have the opportunity to collect dharma from every room of the territory in a process like linking from a node / focusing on a construct / etc.
Example: Every room will have about 10 dharma, collecting dharma is a slow process with a rate of about 1 dharma every 20 seconds. Once the dharma is gone, they have to move.
-Initiating dharma collection is aggressive and will alert defenders of this action.
-The raiders win when they collect x amount of dharma
-Dharma can be used to pay for nice buffs or even bonuses for dharma collection.
-When they win, they immediately get kicked out of the area and they cannot re-enter the area for at least 3-6 IC days (depends on what you guys want)

Defenders
-Once dharma collection is initiated, they only have to kill x raiders within the alloted time.
-If they succeed in doing so, the raiders are kicked out of the area and cannot re-enter for at least 3-6 IC days.

That's about it for the new idea. If you do this idea along with the new change to discourage hit and run raiding, you'll probably get a more balanced raiding experience.

It would be even better if you reviewed other extraneous things like nexus powers, supermob killing, shrine powers, and the cost of dying in enemy territory though.

Especially, since as Lendren has said, you've made raiding harder to do but haven't actually addressed how punishing it is for the losers if the raiders succeed.


My suggestion purely off of this is to cause defending the plane to also reward dharma (either the plane responding to you defending it or by stealing it back from the raiders)

That said I still would like larger and smaller goals for raids to be included, kick and runs initiate it as do smob kills. All of which build up to this lockout.
Unknown2012-03-01 11:26:24
Saqa2012-03-01 11:30:01
How about fixing both the planar fortress problem, and giving both sides objectives at once? Suppose raiders could consume a scarce resource (a quest on a long cooldown? Large amounts of power?) to suppress defences (including discretionaries, perhaps also shrines and reducing smob strength a bit?) on a target plane for an hour (or whatever length of time is suitable), and also significantly boost the turn-in value of things from that plane during the hour (more power, gold, experience, etc).

Worked example with flavour:
1) Magnagora performs a short, easy quest at their research centre for planar technologies, and receive an aetheric disruptor.
2) They go to Celestia and activate it. Now all discretionaries on the plane are significantly weakened or disabled outright for an hour.
3) Magnagora tries to kill angels and turn them in for a large chunk of power. Celest tries to stop that happening.
4) After the hour, the research centre goes back to the drawing board for a week, during which the Magnagoran quest can't be done.

The immediate problems here are:
a) It might encourage off-peak raiding. However, there are orgs that are literally empty at some times of the day, and we don't see their planes getting cleared like clockwork now. Also, suppressing discretionaries is much more useful against active defenders; distort alone is hardly going to kill you.
B) There might be a movement to super huge raids, so that orgs would get the best return on the scarce resource invested in the raid. Perhaps there could be different levels of investment? Say, two exclusionary quests, one on a 24 hour cooldown that reduces the impact of discretionaries if there are 4 or less enemies on the plane, and the other on a week's cooldown that reduces the impact of discretionaries no matter how many enemies are there?
Saran2012-03-01 11:39:11
Saqa:

How about fixing both the planar fortress problem, and giving both sides objectives at once? Suppose raiders could consume a scarce resource (a quest on a long cooldown? Large amounts of power?) to suppress defences (including discretionaries, perhaps also shrines and reducing smob strength a bit?) on a target plane for an hour (or whatever length of time is suitable), and also significantly boost the turn-in value of things from that plane during the hour (more power, gold, experience, etc).

Worked example with flavour:
1) Magnagora performs a short, easy quest at their research centre for planar technologies, and receive an aetheric disruptor.
2) They go to Celestia and activate it. Now all discretionaries on the plane are significantly weakened or disabled outright for an hour.
3) Magnagora tries to kill angels and turn them in for a large chunk of power. Celest tries to stop that happening.
4) After the hour, the research centre goes back to the drawing board for a week, during which the Magnagoran quest can't be done.

The immediate problems here are:
a) It might encourage off-peak raiding. However, there are orgs that are literally empty at some times of the day, and we don't see their planes getting cleared like clockwork now. Also, suppressing discretionaries is much more useful against active defenders; distort alone is hardly going to kill you.
B) There might be a movement to super huge raids, so that orgs would get the best return on the scarce resource invested in the raid. Perhaps there could be different levels of investment? Say, two exclusionary quests, one on a 24 hour cooldown that reduces the impact of discretionaries if there are 4 or less enemies on the plane, and the other on a week's cooldown that reduces the impact of discretionaries no matter how many enemies are there?


Would be so much more awesome if it was...

*tries to shop a horror pic of "when planes attack" but fails*

Off-peak is always going to be an issue, my mind immediately goes to methods for judging defender activity (total players of the defending org logged in for example, measurable active defense, etc). More dharma being rewarded for a "win" and so on. Though much of that runs into issues of allies. Possible work around by locking out a plane for non-participating orgs unless they mechanically choose a side.
Daereth2012-03-01 13:56:37
I will admit to not reading 90% of this thread, but I cannot help myself.

When are we going to stop having these threads? Person1 complains because they died to Person2? Queue annoying raiding changes that limit and cripple 85% of the game. Yes, I said it. Conflict is 85% of the game, more than that even. Once you get to Demigod what are you going to do now? Without conflict (Raiding and other such things) you actually have nothing to do but socialize. Let's face it people. How many of you are going to stick around and buy credits for that?

There is nothing wrong with raiding. Actually, there are a lot of things wrong with raiding. It's too freakin hard. Let's have a thread about removing things instead! I'll actively read that one, I assure you. I honestly do not think most of you are even considering what will happen to the game if you keep going down this path. So let's think about the big picture. Like 5 years from now? After you've made it impossible to bash or emote aggressively at someone because they might find it offensive?
Lendren2012-03-01 14:01:15
Daereth:
I will admit to not reading 90% of this thread,

You really didn't have to admit it, your post made that pretty clear.
Kiradawea2012-03-01 14:18:13
If we're going for this Dharma idea, how about the amount of Dharma you siphon depend upon the sum of people in the city. So if there's none around, you can't siphon Dharma. If there's one around you siphon x amount every y time, and if there is five about you siphon 5x amount every y time. Could even potentially include city ranks in the equation. So if there's a CR 1 about, you only siphon x, while if there's a CR 6 about, you siphon 6x or 3x or whatever.

Alternatively, the siphon speed is determined by how many attackers there are contra citizens. So if there's only one citizen in Hallifax about, then when Celest raids Continuum with one or six people, the speed would be the same.
Unknown2012-03-01 17:01:26
Kiradawea:

If we're going for this Dharma idea, how about the amount of Dharma you siphon depend upon the sum of people in the city. So if there's none around, you can't siphon Dharma. If there's one around you siphon x amount every y time, and if there is five about you siphon 5x amount every y time. Could even potentially include city ranks in the equation. So if there's a CR 1 about, you only siphon x, while if there's a CR 6 about, you siphon 6x or 3x or whatever.

Alternatively, the siphon speed is determined by how many attackers there are contra citizens. So if there's only one citizen in Hallifax about, then when Celest raids Continuum with one or six people, the speed would be the same.


It will probably get skewed with organizations with large populations of non-combatants (as Serenwilde likes to present itself as).


@
Saran:


My suggestion purely off of this is to cause defending the plane to also reward dharma (either the plane responding to you defending it or by stealing it back from the raiders)

That said I still would like larger and smaller goals for raids to be included, kick and runs initiate it as do smob kills. All of which build up to this lockout.


The defending side's 'reward' is that it gets to keep its dharma.

P.S. I agree with a rename. Dharma is weird to use.
Malarious2012-03-01 17:24:46
Enyalida:

Just going to comment on this. Specifically the things we're asking for are utility abilities and upgrades to civic structures. Also, that's not really what 'power creep' means anyways. Illums being released was power creep.


You need to loosen how you view things, it is power creep.

Upgrades to civic structures and utility abilities means what? Side A can raid to have easier access to villages, or increased sipping which works in raiding, or what? Most any tangible benefit will in some way come back to aiding the "winning side" with even further advantages. You can say its utility powers, but so is having a second trade skill, which still comes around to combat. Unless you have amazing ideas that will never "benefit" someone this will just result in one side being even better at it.

You are all trying to destroy raiding as a whole instead of just stopping long raids or kick and runs. A week long lock out, ha. Being locked out because you had to go grab someone else? Ha. Most of the ideas so far are overly strict and made in a way to stop raiding in general, we already have a low conflict rate.

Power creep is the gradual unbalancing of a game due to successive releases of new content. The phenomenon may be caused by a number of different factors and, in extreme cases, can be damaging to the longevity of the game in which it takes place.

Every release so far has improved the "winning sides" ability to continue winning.
Unknown2012-03-01 17:40:43
Apart from the "low conflict rate," I agree with everything you just said.

"Low" is a relative term, based entirely on your perspective. In general, the winning side wants more conflict and the losing side is just tired of it.