-Wise Fox- wrote:

I think what you said is total bullshit if you give a person a safezone of some kind they will abuse it for example: a high level is running to you because you stole cash from him then you hide in the safezone where you can't be injured since you're a lower level it doesn't seem fair at all.

That is why DU took away safezones in the first place a lot of people were abusing the safezones to run from problems.

Also the game is PVP what do you expect also spam killing is very rare and permanently injured takes off after you died and you can learn how to unbind yourself after you get enough energy and skill points.

Like I said. A new player isn't going to like logging on and getting killed or spam killed which DOES happen in DU. Plus, you expect a new player to log on knowing how to do all this stuff in 5 minutes?

There is an easy fix to safe zone abuse, block new players from exploring lands and only allow them to go to said lands after ranking up or leveling up. OR you can put timers on drops so players can't go around stealing drops in the first place. DU's safe zone system actually did suck and was poorly thought-out if you really want to know. Personally I hate safe zone systems where high levels can run into them for protection, safe zones should only be for weak players. But anyway for the second system new players wouldn't be able to PVP until a certain level which means no attacking or dying by players but they can still be killed by mobs. That is NOTHING like the DU safe zone system of people running into safe zones when they are losing in PVP.


This was also only one way to implant a PVP protection system i've got tons of ideas to create protection for new players that can't be abused.

Also even if it is PVP it doesn't mean it's "Spam kill the newb time!" you can't expect not to lose players if they log on to being owned and taunted by players they couldn't hope to beat right? There has to be a system in place to help new players until they are at least able to protect themselves.

So... I might be wrong... but from what I can tell you guys are saying there is no way to create a fair system. In the end there will always be someone who will fall into the cracks and make it work for them.

As for safe zone I feel it is need for the simple reason that people need a place where they can feel safe when they are not fighting. If someone doesn't want to fight no matter what level shouldn't have to. For my game I only have one safe zone place where is no where near anything of value and it seems to work fine, unless you count someone dieing and wanting a rematch.

But I still feel like there is away that is being over looked that could make everyone no mater when joining near the same level.

From what I can think of this can be done in many(extreme) ways.

Such as removing training all together. Give everyone who starts a set amount of skill points. They can spend it however they wish. The point of the game will no longer be to stats but instead to learn new skills, gain weapon. And changing the whole gaining power idea into pure quest and learning new things.

Changing the Level cap weekly, instead of keeping the level cap at one level have it grow weekly. So let's say the level will raise by 10 levels a week. This will give people a reason to keep training every week and will give new people a chance to catch up. In order to benefit people who have been playing longer depending on the date have a cap leveling system that will let them stay ahead of the curve by a few levels. Let's say 3 levels for one week, 6 for 2 weeks 10 for 3 weeks, you would have to be active during that time. After the 3rd week it will it will max out and by that time players will no longer be considered new.

I don't know why I keep putting more ideas out there but I really think there is a way to create a fair system... Just can't seem to think of it yet.

Archfiend Master wrote:

So... I might be wrong... but from what I can tell you guys are saying there is no way to create a fair system. In the end there will always be someone who will fall into the cracks and make it work for them.

As for safe zone I feel it is need for the simple reason that people need a place where they can feel safe when they are not fighting. If someone doesn't want to fight no matter what level shouldn't have to. For my game I only have one safe zone place where is no where near anything of value and it seems to work fine, unless you count someone dieing and wanting a rematch.

But I still feel like there is away that is being over looked that could make everyone no mater when joining near the same level.

From what I can think of this can be done in many(extreme) ways.

Such as removing training all together. Give everyone who starts a set amount of skill points. They can spend it however they wish. The point of the game will no longer be to stats but instead to learn new skills, gain weapon. And changing the whole gaining power idea into pure quest and learning new things.

Changing the Level cap weekly, instead of keeping the level cap at one level have it grow weekly. So let's say the level will raise by 10 levels a week. This will give people a reason to keep training every week and will give new people a chance to catch up. In order to benefit people who have been playing longer depending on the date have a cap leveling system that will let them stay ahead of the curve by a few levels. Let's say 3 levels for one week, 6 for 2 weeks 10 for 3 weeks, you would have to be active during that time. After the 3rd week it will it will max out and by that time players will no longer be considered new.

I don't know why I keep putting more ideas out there but I really think there is a way to create a fair system... Just can't seem to think of it yet.

My point about safe zones is that it creates an environment that motivates new players and welcomes them to the game without pushing them into pvp so early on. My second point is that I can't even imagine a game with a perfectly balanced system. I just feel like you can cater to new players or you can make it more towards older players. I guess find the audience and stick with them. If your game is good people will play it and stick around there will always be someone that hates it.

The real answer isn't to do what you think is right, but rather, to ask players what they think by examining what they do rather than actually asking them.

Listening to your playerbase will most of the time, lead you in the wrong direction. Watching what people actually do, though, and noticing trends or patterns will tell you if you are on the right track.

Redrogrin wrote:

-Wise Fox- wrote:

Redrogrin wrote:

-Wise Fox- wrote:

I think what you said is total bullshit if you give a person a safezone of some kind they will abuse it for example: a high level is running to you because you stole cash from him then you hide in the safezone where you can't be injured since you're a lower level it doesn't seem fair at all.

That is why DU took away safezones in the first place a lot of people were abusing the safezones to run from problems.

Also the game is PVP what do you expect also spam killing is very rare and permanently injured takes off after you died and you can learn how to unbind yourself after you get enough energy and skill points.

Like I said. A new player isn't going to like logging on and getting killed or spam killed which DOES happen in DU. Plus, you expect a new player to log on knowing how to do all this stuff in 5 minutes?

There is an easy fix to safe zone abuse, block new players from exploring lands and only allow them to go to said lands after ranking up or leveling up. OR you can put timers on drops so players can't go around stealing drops in the first place. DU's safe zone system actually did suck and was poorly thought-out if you really want to know. Personally I hate safe zone systems where high levels can run into them for protection, safe zones should only be for weak players. But anyway for the second system new players wouldn't be able to PVP until a certain level which means no attacking or dying by players but they can still be killed by mobs. That is NOTHING like the DU safe zone system of people running into safe zones when they are losing in PVP.


This was also only one way to implant a PVP protection system i've got tons of ideas to create protection for new players that can't be abused.

Also even if it is PVP it doesn't mean it's "Spam kill the newb time!" you can't expect not to lose players if they log on to being owned and taunted by players they couldn't hope to beat right? There has to be a system in place to help new players until they are at least able to protect themselves.

They will learn by dying. You can't make everything in life fair you know.

This isn't real life though. It's a virtual world where anything is possible. People are fickle when it comes to games, especially this new generation of gamers. They will rage quit if they don't like the way things are going in the beginning and move on to the other millions of games out there. It's not bad to help a new player out and give them a break earlier in the game. After all you are less likely to permanently leave if you actually put in a couple of hours effort. That's why there has to be a balance. At some point you have to take the training wheels off.

Maybe I could make a system that will run on tiers. Any attacks or skills will not effect anyone outside of your tier. Have one for beginners, and make the cut of point for that tier to a point where I feel they should know what's going on. Have a mid tier for people who is trying to reach the power cap. and the last tier would be near the top. And make it so that the tier system can be turn off an on whenever it is needed to.

Safe zones are great for beginners to use as learning grounds and to get on their feet, but they should only work up until the point that the player first leaves their protection. Once they've decided to venture out into the "real world", don't give them any more protection, even if they return to the safe zone.

I say, if you want to prevent players from killing each other under certain circumstances (basically, when the killer is much stronger than the victim), then you remove/reduce/reverse their incentives for doing so. You go at them psychologically, rather than with in-game prevention measures (like safe zones, or preventing combat between players at different tiers, etc.) You convince them to not do it, by making it not worth their while, or by making it downright punishing to them.

Right off the bat, killing a player who is much weaker than you should give you absolutely no return. No stat gains, no loot, nothing.

This way, the only motive in killing a weaker opponent becomes grief killing. (though that was likely the only motive from the beginning...)

How to keep that in check? You punish the killer. Call it karma, call it skill atrophy from not pushing your limit, but killing a weaker opponent should have a negative stat change. The greater the difference, the greater the drop.

Maxed-out players will think twice about terrorizing the noobs, because each kill will hit them where it really hurts.

Alternatively, set up a system where skills automatically atrophy over time, and only fighting/killing worthy opponents can maintain those stats and/or make gains. Killing weaker opponents gains them nothing, and their stats will keep slipping back down.

Sure, none of this will wipe out grief killing (some people just love it too much!), but it will deter most of it (especially if you make it incredibly punishing)

SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:

I say, if you want to prevent players from killing each other under certain circumstances (basically, when the killer is much stronger than the victim), then you remove/reduce/reverse their incentives for doing so. You go at them psychologically, rather than with in-game prevention measures (like safe zones, or preventing combat between players at different tiers, etc.) You convince them to not do it, by making it not worth their while, or by making it downright punishing to them.

Right off the bat, killing a player who is much weaker than you should give you absolutely no return. No stat gains, no loot, nothing.

This way, the only motive in killing a weaker opponent becomes grief killing. (though that was likely the only motive from the beginning...)

How to keep that in check? You punish the killer. Call it karma, call it skill atrophy from not pushing your limit, but killing a weaker opponent should have a negative stat change. The greater the difference, the greater the drop.

Maxed-out players will think twice about terrorizing the noobs, because each kill will hit them where it really hurts.

Alternatively, set up a system where skills automatically atrophy over time, and only fighting/killing worthy opponents can maintain those stats and/or make gains. Killing weaker opponents gains them nothing, and their stats will keep slipping back down.

Sure, none of this will wipe out grief killing (some people just love it too much!), but it will deter most of it (especially if you make it incredibly punishing)

The idea sounds great. The only problem I can think of it is what happen when a weak player, or a group of weak players, decides and go attack a stronger person. Knowing your stats can be effected if you fought back and kill the group. I thought about how to get around this and you can have a so call "Golden Rule" to where if someone attacks you, no matter the level you can kill them with no punishment. But if a group came along then you would have to keep track of who attack you before you can kill someone. If I made it to were it target everyone in the area someone weak might just fallow them and attack them when people are around to make everyone fair game. But it is a great idea and I will try to fine away to get around those things and do something like this.