Promotiong Interfaction Strife: A think tank.

Problem: Heroes and Villains have been repeatedly pushed toward mutual understanding, love, peace, and cooperation.

In the beginning, it was Pocket D. A fun little distraction with a weird mission involving valentine's day.

Then came the coop zones and TFs.

Then came the grey moralities.

These are all great things, but with I19 around the corner advertising even more cooperative content, I fear we've lost sight of something.

Heroes and Villains are not friends. They are as diametrically opposed in ideologies as it gets.

Villains and Vigilantes are even less so. Vigilantes don't want Villains Arrested. They want them DEAD.

Heroes and Rogues are about as morally compatible as it gets in the general theme of things. Rogues aren't picky as long as there's a payday involved, and Heroes might logically tolerate them as long as they're not being TOO evil... at the time.

I'm not saying these features are bad. The coop zones are fun, and from a development standpoint a smart way to design content that can reach a broader number of players.

However, I am saying that with all of these optional systems to enable cooperation, why haven't there been similar systems put in place to encourage being enemies?

Yes, PvP zones exist. However they were implemented at one point, found unpopular, and forgotten. Part of it is the repeated changes and updates which turned PvP in to a buyer's game. Part of it is that those systems require the player to stop what they're already doing to go enforce the law or sense of powersonal power upon someone else.

Why does a vigilante go to the rogue isles? Thematically, he's be doing it to punish the wicked. In reality, he's going there to get lovey dovey with the enemy.

Thus, I begin this thread to focus on think tanking optional systems to promote the struggle of good versus evil in the player space.

System 1: The Archnemesis.

The Archnemesis system aims to put two players from opposing factions in to a long terms relation of mutual disdain. Its design goals are to promote interaction and combat between the two players in a manner that is acceptable to both of them, and create a gameplay environment where awareness of ones Arch is an inescapable fact of life for both players.

Upon reaching level 50, the player will be given the option to opt in to the Arching system via notoriety contacts. Each player selects the level of involvement they prefer from among the following options:

Legal attack conditions - Where can I be attacked by my Arch? City zones, SG base, inside instanced missions, on TFs, etc. It is important to tailor these options so that players can specifically choose their level of involvement.

Death Penalties - None, inspiration drops, salvage drops, recipe drops.

These conditions go both ways. When you've selected the specifics of your arching arrangement, the system will randomly select a player from the opposing faction with matching conditions. This means if you want the potential to beat down your arch for recipes by ambushing him in the middle of a door mission, your arch can do the same to you. This is a mutual system that ensures the players involved get exactly what they signed up for. The system is random to promote player interaction and target diversity, as well as prevent exploitation of additional reward mechanics.

Tracking - Okay, great, you've got an Arch. Where is that arch? With the vastness of the game, how do we find out where to spring our trap, or stop that villain from finishing off a longbow base?

The answer is informants. Informants are an inf sink which allows each player to spend a specific amount of infamy on a per zone basis to keep a "man on the street" with an eye out for your arch. For each zone I want watched, I can pay an informant contact a static amount in inf to notify me via the events channel for 24 hours if my arch is sighted in that zone. If I am normally unable to travel to that zone, I would have the opportunity to do so as as long as my arch has not travelled to another zone. (Example: My Arch was sighted in Atlas park, but I am a villain. I can travel to Atlas Park, and remain there even if he enters door missions or his SG base. However, if he hops a train to go to another zone, I will be ejected.)

Additionally, if my arch is a moral tourist (vigi or rogue) I will be automatically notified by any NPC my arch talks to on my "home turf" (E.G. If my vigilant arch sells salvage at the Cap Au Diable black market, Shady Mia would tell me about it.)

Rewards!

In addition to the optional loot drops, The arching system confers a themed power called victory. Victory is roughly equivalent to an accolade power in terms of effect and recharge. There are multiple versions of victory, and they are all self-only powers. These include a full range buffs (self +damage(all) Self +res(all), etc.) but I can only select one.

However, if I am defeated, I lose access to the victory power. In turn, my arch gains access to his. This means that between the two characters, only one will have access to victory at any given time... the current victor of our last battle.

The Strength of victory is directly proportional to the amount of legal attack methods I have selected. If I have selected zone-only vulnerability, my victory power (and that of my arch) will be far less powerful than that of someone who has elected to be vulnerable at all times.

Quitting -

I can end the arching relationship at any time by visiting an notoriety contact and surrendering. If my Arch surrenders, I gain not only badge progress, but I get to keep a disposable (stacking) temp power version of the victory power. In addition, my Arch's name is added to my personal info under "Arch-nemeses Defeated" to prove that I am clearly the superior crimefighter/agent of discord. My defeated nemesis gets to keep nothing.

Sorry, but as a tank, I'm too busy smashing stuff up to worry about thinking.



Unfortunately, with an archnemesis system like you're talking about it only really works if both sides consent, are on at the same time, and want to actually stop what they're doing to go mash their opponent's face (sorry, gotta leave the Hami raid! Have to go beat down my archnemesis so he still knows I care!).

Also, how do you balance say an IO'ed-to-the-gills Brute against an SO'ed-at-best Defender?

Honestly, I believe such a system will fail due to apathy over time.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

You lost me at PvP, I'm afraid. I'm not opposed to a nemesis style system, but I don't think it's something you want to tie to PvP, simply because it isn't needed. Now, having an option to assign a real player as your nemesis, that I can't really argue about, but if that nemesis HAD to be a player, then I'm not interested.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Gonna point out some devils advocate factors.

1. Villains are not always committing crimes 24/7. When they're not committing crimes, there's not a damn thing a true hero can do about i because they're doing nothing "wrong".

2. Villains and heroes meet and negotiate all the time. They aren't allies but they do not like each other obviously. Pocket D has changed this, there's nothing you can do about that really :/

3. Heroes and villains do occasionally work together. However, ICly places like the rikti war zone are not the norm

4. Player attitudes are not entirely the games fault, they are players faults. The player decides what his character is going to do and not do. The game just fosters the already present scene and lets it thrive.

5. It's difficult to RP truly evil characters in public for the very reason that it often either involves PVP or RP fighting in which someone "god modes" and kills the fun.

Eh, once on my vigilante I went from Paragon to Rogue Isles to join the Barracuda Strike Force upon which I immediately went back to Paragon and started robbing the hell out of it.

What about instead you do things to disrupt your arch instead of directly PvP them (but perhaps leave direct PvP as one of the opt in options). For example, you hear Bob is on a mission, so you go do X. Once you've done X, a squad of Longbow ambush Bob in his mission. Or he gets hit with a Chemical Warhead nuke. Or somesuch or othersuch that'd be debilitative and disruptive without direct conflict between the players.

I am in complete agreement with you here Shadestorm, particularly the bit about "one big blob of grey with no more black and white."

Currently, I only have one vigilante, and it is because I had him written as a vigilante from day 1 of his existence. Naturally, I made him an official vigilante once Going Rogue went live, but I have no intention of ever setting foot in the Rogue Isles with him. Because, as you said, in my mind a Vigilante is a character who punishes the wicked rather than simply subduing and arresting them. I also agree that the tip mission choices encompassed that mentality quite well.

Now, I understand that the intention behind the Hero-->Vigilante-->Villain progression was that at some point a vigilante might go too far and kill someone by accident, or that didn't deserve it, or whatever, and complete their "journey towards the dark side."

I also get, and respect, that the alignment/morality system was kept general in order to allow for everyone to write/create their own story. That openness and flexibility is one of the reasons I love the game. However, I agree that there could be something more in there. But that's for a later post.

Personally, I love the idea of having an arch-nemesis, but I hate the idea of someone being able to ambush me wherever, even if they were in the parameters of what we set when we made the nemesis "agreement." My alt-oholism aside, eventually I would forget, and then get really pissed when I wound up dead while, say, crafting something in my SG base. I know it would be way different, but too many times have I been innocently trying to gather ore samples in Bloody Bay and had a big red "ASSASSIN'S MOVE" appear above my head.

Alternatively, completing tasks that would make things more difficult for my nemesis, or add a certain complication to my nemesis's missions, is an idea I really like. I would be all for options like:

• Giving your nemesis a random ambush per day.
• A booby-trapped drop at the completion of a mission, which would give some kind of random debuff or other semi-annoying-but-not-altogether-hindering effect for a certain amount of time (and perhaps ways to get around this i.e. a minor DoT effect simulating poison could be removed by visiting a hospital nurse).
• An instanced mission given as a response to any mission you just completed. For example: "While you were busy completing that task, your nemesis has made a bomb threat against the city. It is set to blow in 15 minutes!" Thus you have 15 minutes to get to a train station and load into one of the large scale city maps and find the explosives before time runs out.

The problem with a Nemesis System.

And forcing PvP is also a huge no-no.

Sooo... Maybe have the Devs write -actual- Vigilante and Rogue content in the Isles and in Paragon so that after my Rogue hits Rhode Island she can be a Rogue, instead of immediately becoming a hero?Or so my Vigilante can dispense some gritty 1970/80s comics style justice in the Etoille instead of immediately robbing banks and kicking puppies for fun?

-Rachel-

I think a nemesis system is certainly something the devs have looked at

Yeah, the jump from vigilante to villain tips is a little jarring.

You go from being maybe a little too willing to let sacrifices be made, to...

"There's a Longbow base in St. Martial... but it's not doing enough! BLOW IT UP!"

/shrug.

I don't see my characters as heros or villains.

they are just characters playing in a game world.

If I had the choice for ALL of my toons to be able to go to any zone or do any content in the game, I'd take it.