Comments on: Segregating Player Power http://mu.ranter.net I miss my frames. Mon, 02 Jan 2012 07:46:01 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Bamko http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power/comment-page-1#comment-206 Bamko Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:42:04 +0000 http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power#comment-206 I am wrestling with this concept at the moment. A suggestion would be to have the realms negotiate the numbers between the realms. So everyone knows when you go from Realm A to Realm B you will be nerfed by 2, but the exp you gain there will transfer back at a rate of 10:1 but if you go to Realm C, you get buffed by 4, but none if the exp OR loot is transferable back, because Realm A guys think that Realm C has too much powerleveling. You can still play it, but whatever you gain there would stay there. So question would then be, could you send a clone, which would stay there, while your original toon stays in first realm? Well, Realm A may allow it, because hey, not like clone is ever coming back, and Realm C may allow it, because 'players are players, bodies are bodies'. Or they might not allow it. Realms which players like to play in, and behave in a manner to encourage players will thrive, and realms which don't, won't. That is the idea anyway. I am wrestling with this concept at the moment. A suggestion would be to have the realms negotiate the numbers between the realms. So everyone knows when you go from Realm A to Realm B you will be nerfed by 2, but the exp you gain there will transfer back at a rate of 10:1 but if you go to Realm C, you get buffed by 4, but none if the exp OR loot is transferable back, because Realm A guys think that Realm C has too much powerleveling. You can still play it, but whatever you gain there would stay there.

So question would then be, could you send a clone, which would stay there, while your original toon stays in first realm? Well, Realm A may allow it, because hey, not like clone is ever coming back, and Realm C may allow it, because ‘players are players, bodies are bodies’. Or they might not allow it.

Realms which players like to play in, and behave in a manner to encourage players will thrive, and realms which don’t, won’t.

That is the idea anyway.

]]> By: Mu http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power/comment-page-1#comment-38 Mu Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:43:02 +0000 http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power#comment-38 "The only issue here is if a player of power 15, in Britain, reaches power 16 in Feyland, then returns to Britain, he’ll mysteriously only have power 8, despite having been 15 slightly earlier." Umm, that's fairly significant. The point of arbitrary power caps by region is to allow player A, who powergames a lot, to team up with player B, who doesn't, in an arena where player B is comfortable operating at a competitive level. Let's say Britain is capped at level 15. Player A has long since gone into Feyland and has gotten to level 20, but gets a call from player B (level 13) who wants to go adventuring in Britain. Player A returns to Britain and is capped at 15, and they go off hunting rabbits or whatever. Cutting player A to 10 is pretty harsh and disincentivizes him to ever return to Britain, and then you have the same problem you have before, inability to team with players of disparate playstyles. Note that the use of levels in the example is for simplicity's sake. I dislike level systems in general. “The only issue here is if a player of power 15, in Britain, reaches power 16 in Feyland, then returns to Britain, he’ll mysteriously only have power 8, despite having been 15 slightly earlier.”

Umm, that’s fairly significant. The point of arbitrary power caps by region is to allow player A, who powergames a lot, to team up with player B, who doesn’t, in an arena where player B is comfortable operating at a competitive level. Let’s say Britain is capped at level 15. Player A has long since gone into Feyland and has gotten to level 20, but gets a call from player B (level 13) who wants to go adventuring in Britain. Player A returns to Britain and is capped at 15, and they go off hunting rabbits or whatever. Cutting player A to 10 is pretty harsh and disincentivizes him to ever return to Britain, and then you have the same problem you have before, inability to team with players of disparate playstyles.

Note that the use of levels in the example is for simplicity’s sake. I dislike level systems in general.

]]> By: 00Davo http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power/comment-page-1#comment-37 00Davo Sat, 11 Apr 2009 03:54:56 +0000 http://mu.ranter.net/design-theory/general-topics/segregating-player-power#comment-37 Actually, individual players would need only one set of attributes. You can set up an algorithmic difference between the "planes" - for example, the maximum attribute in Britain is 15 - in Feyland, make it max 30. Then, Feyland characters have their attributes simply halved when visiting Britain. The next area could have a max of, say, 45. Divide by three for Britain, and by 1.5 for Feyland. Fairly simple. The only issue here is if a player of power 15, in Britain, reaches power 16 in Feyland, then returns to Britain, he'll mysteriously only have power 8, despite having been 15 slightly earlier. Could be justified through another black box - "energy drain when plane-shifting", maybe? Actually, individual players would need only one set of attributes. You can set up an algorithmic difference between the “planes” – for example, the maximum attribute in Britain is 15 – in Feyland, make it max 30. Then, Feyland characters have their attributes simply halved when visiting Britain. The next area could have a max of, say, 45. Divide by three for Britain, and by 1.5 for Feyland. Fairly simple. The only issue here is if a player of power 15, in Britain, reaches power 16 in Feyland, then returns to Britain, he’ll mysteriously only have power 8, despite having been 15 slightly earlier. Could be justified through another black box – “energy drain when plane-shifting”, maybe?

]]>