Death penalty


Anti_Proton

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanden View Post
No, it only means that there's no harsh penalty for defeat.

With regards to the "death express", it's a completely different context from just losing a fight. In the "free ride" example, you're willingly letting yourself be defeated. You're achieving your goal. You're still in control. When you lose a fight, you're not willingly relinquishing control of your character. It's being forcibly taken from you, because you've failed.

It's a completely different thing to be sitting at your desk with a pencil and paper trying to objectively quantify a proper punishment for losing, and actually experiencing that loss yourself. You think that just because the player suffers no numerical loss for defeat, it's meaningless, but the player sees it differently; he lost, he died. And players hate to lose.
I really couldn't have said it better myself.
I've never understood the need of some players (or Devs for that matter) to punish the player for failure. Speaking for myself, the failure itself is punishment enough. And honestly, until the Devs completely eliminate the chance for high level ambushes to spawn in low level zones for certain missions, a steeper death penalty has no place here.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by MunkiLord View Post
This thread got real stupid, real quick. Just sayin'

Happens. A lot.


 

Posted

As others have said, should one desire severe penalties for defeat, the tools exist right now to punish oneself quite severely; up to and including the death-by-deletion of the "failing" character.

Anyone has the right to do this to their own alts all the livelong day. Please do so, and stop trying to dictate what others do with theirs.

When I was new to the game, one day I was redside with a friend and his girlfriend, in a Nemesis mission cranked up to Relentle..... I mean, Redonkulous. We were in an office building and the Nemesis were chasing us through elevators. I died so many times and got so upset that I actually logged off to avoid more debt. [I was new to MMOs, and foolish] That is quite funny to me now, but my point is that some people hate death penalties just that much. Let's not scare off new people, whatcha say? I will never devote time and effort to see a defeated character wiped off my character roster. I would never pay to be treated like that.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger42 View Post
Again, I ask, why is it so abhorrent to some people for MMOs to penalize failure when every other genre of games does so?
Yeah, the death penalty in Call of Duty is brutal.

Oh, wait...


"And in this moment, I will not run.
It is my place to stand.
We few shall carry hope
Within our bloodied hands."

 

Posted

Personally, I feel that people should keep their noses out of my business and stop trying to motivate me to play better so that I serve their purposes more appropriately. If you feel that a lack of permadeath has made me a sloppy, unappealing team-mate, then don't team with me. I will not miss your hardcore company and I'm sure you'll find a much more capable team-mate than me.

Personally, the only motivation I want my games to give me is the motivation to have fun. If that means leaping off the tops of tall buildings, fine. If that means fighting with no regard for safety, fine. I don't need the grim reaper tapping me on the shoulder to have fun, perplexing as that might sound.

As long as defeat is not the preferable way to win fights - and it isn't - then no death penalty is necessary. The point of death penalty mechanics isn't to make people AFRAID of defeat, it's to make defeat the worst possible solution to any problem. Even absent from debt, being defeated is still the worst possible solution to any fight in City of Heroes in all but a few cases. Resurrecting in battle is perilous and takes many inspirations to avoid being rekilled, and even then it puts you at a disadvantage. Going to the hospital takes time and involves much zoning, all the while your enemies are regenerating.

On the flip side, defeat IS a legitimate combat strategy if you have an offensive or at least reliable self-resurrection power. People who have Rise of the Phoenix or Soul Transfer are well justified to save their inspirations, allow themselves to be killed and then resurrect for massive damage or powerful stun, as well as a full heal and endurance recovery. When others on your team have ally resurrection powers, then it's reasonable to focus on saving one person while letting another fall, because that other can be resurrected with full health and endurance. These are legitimate strategies. Resurrection powers are not the red-headed stepchildren of power picks that are only useful if you screw up. They are legitimate powers, and avoiding using them is exactly why death penalties are stupid.

Games are not fun when they punish their players. Players who ask for punishment to OTHERS for self-serving reasons are hypocrites.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
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.

 

Posted

I'd be okay with adding #8: Stacking Debuffs, with a couple caveats.

1) They can't be too debilitating, dying and coming back completely unable to effectively do anything would suck. Keep it something simple like a 10% damage debuff for 120 seconds after rezzing, or a 10% to-hit debuff. Nothing crazy. It could also be counteracted by something as simple as poppiing an inspiration.

2) The debuff should only happen when you use a wakie or a temp rez power. Any actual rez powers such as Rise of the Phoenix or Soul Transfer should not apply the debuff, since they are part of that powerset's theme. Ally rezzes should not apply it either.

3) Going to the hospital should not apply the debuff, and if you die multiple times within the 120 second window, going to the hospital should remove any that have stacked thus far. But, using rez powers won't remove previously acquired debuffs, so if you use a wakie and then die and are rezzed by an empath, it will prevent a second debuff, but won't remove the first.

4) There should be a limit to how many debuffs can stack at once. Like, say, a stack of 5 would be the max. If you die 5 times in less than 2 minutes, you have bigger problems than how many debuffs you have on you anyway.

It's something that would add some flavor to the game, but it wouldn't be too horrible for people if they happen to die a few times in rapid succession. It would also make sense, you just died and came back from the dead, or were on death's door, it is perfectly reasonable for you to be slightly less effective for a couple minutes afterward.

Now, I don't necessarily think this needs to be added. But if I had to choose something from the OPs list other than "Nothing", that's the one I would pick.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
I'd be okay with adding #8: Stacking Debuffs, with a couple caveats.
Again, NO. This game already has sufficient debuffs on death. Yes, really. Melee characters lose their toggles, Dominators and Brutes lose their special power charge, all classes lose any ongoing pseudo pet powers (like freezing rain) and the pet classes lose their actual pets. (Which in the case of at least some Masterminds, means a 100% reduction in ability to inflict DPS of any kind *and* a massive reduction in their effective hit points.) And that's assuming an ally or self res that would allow you to survive standing up in the middle of a pack of enemies that just stomped your face in while you were presumably at full power. (Or half a tray of inspirations and enough luck that Random Minion Five doesn't one-shot you while you're trying to click through all of them.)

Death Penalties are *not* a necessary part of game design. They're something that gets included because "everyone else is doing it." Just like character advancement levels, and giant spiders, and "Kill 10 guys" missions, and all the other things that seem to be in every MMO and RPG ever made.


 

Posted

Why would it be such a horrible thing to add a 10% damage debuff that only applies when you use a wakie, lasts for 2 minutes, and can be easily circumvented by using a single red inspiration?

It's barely more than we have now. Since you only replied to the one sentence, I get the feeling you stopped reading my post right there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
Why would it be such a horrible thing to add a 10% damage debuff that only applies when you use a wakie, lasts for 2 minutes, and can be easily circumvented by using a single red inspiration?

It's barely more than we have now. Since you only replied to the one sentence, I get the feeling you stopped reading my post right there.
Because once you fail, it becomes harder to succeed.

Your other points are just qualifications to restrict and limit the idea, which I'd argue do a lot more to actually take away from any actual meaning of the penalty. It appears to only apply when being in groups without a rez. Solo, you'll tend to have a preference for hosping it anyway unless you manage to die far enough away to avoid getting quarter-smacked, or you have enough other inspirations [break free, cab] to manage. In a league, you have the hospital in zone... Sure it's the 20s/10s, but contrasted with also needing to recover from the disorient and end drop [potentially a lot easier than solo especially with various destiny buffs] it's easier, but still da zerg!

It just slows down the game. Which is something that will typically run very counter to the premise of anti-zerg.


Let's Dance!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanden View Post
No, it only means that there's no harsh penalty for defeat.

With regards to the "death express", it's a completely different context from just losing a fight. In the "free ride" example, you're willingly letting yourself be defeated. You're achieving your goal. You're still in control. When you lose a fight, you're not willingly relinquishing control of your character. It's being forcibly taken from you, because you've failed.

It's a completely different thing to be sitting at your desk with a pencil and paper trying to objectively quantify a proper punishment for losing, and actually experiencing that loss yourself. You think that just because the player suffers no numerical loss for defeat, it's meaningless, but the player sees it differently; he lost, he died. And players hate to lose.
What I'm saying is that's not universally true. Not all players view dying as "losing", especially when there are no meaningful consequences for it. Yes, to you and other players, the death in itself may be a meaningful consequence, but to others, it's not. I just feel when it's viewed as a free teleport to save < 5 minutes of running, it indicates that the penalty isn't meaningful.




Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Razoras View Post
In one specific instance, yes. If you want to stretch it to all death in said game as meaningless, you're going to need to come up with more anecdotes.
WHo said one specific instance? People do it in that game on a regular basis.




Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by reiella View Post
Because once you fail, it becomes harder to succeed.

Your other points are just qualifications to restrict and limit the idea, which I'd argue do a lot more to actually take away from any actual meaning of the penalty. It appears to only apply when being in groups without a rez. Solo, you'll tend to have a preference for hosping it anyway unless you manage to die far enough away to avoid getting quarter-smacked, or you have enough other inspirations [break free, cab] to manage. In a league, you have the hospital in zone... Sure it's the 20s/10s, but contrasted with also needing to recover from the disorient and end drop [potentially a lot easier than solo especially with various destiny buffs] it's easier, but still da zerg!

It just slows down the game. Which is something that will typically run very counter to the premise of anti-zerg.
Okay, let's just remove death from the game completely, so the game will never be slowed down.

If penalties for dying are such a bad thing, let's remove the penalty of not being able to act while you're dead too.

If you get down to 0 HP, your health and end refill automatically, just as though you'd been rezzed by an empath on the spot. No one ever dies again, and everyone is happy...except for the people who have and use their enemy affecting rez powers.

I know, a pop up that asks you if you WANT to be defeated! That would work great! That way the people who want to use RotP or Soul transfer still get to, and the people that want no penalties to apply don't ever have to die!

And, no, I'm not actually serious about this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger42 View Post
That's kinda the point of death penalties, though. When death is meaningful, it tends to encourage people to get better.

Again, I ask, why is it so abhorrent to some people for MMOs to penalize failure when every other genre of games does so?

Harsh penalties for death were the original status quo for RPGs in general, whether it was tabletop or electronic. In part this was because earlier games were often more concerned with creating "adventures" than a "combat game" like most MMOs have evolved into. Tabletop games also had a GameMaster to directly mediate them, and "combat" was much less frequent. (You can see this at work in some of the older electronic RPGs that converted tabletop rules--1 minute in, you get flattened, because what would take 10 minutes to resolve in a table session flies by when the computer takes over. You also end up fighting more enemies in electronic games--the usual XP conversion rate from table to elec is around 5-10% of the table version's value for the same enemy.)

Over the years death penalties have gradually rolled further and further back. There is a lot that could be said about this, but one thing I think that we have to keep in mind that when you create a harsh death penalty you are making a statement about the fairness of character balance. A very punishing system puts pressure on power designers to get their powers exactly right, because players who fail are going to often blame that first. In a game like City of Heroes were the design goal is essentially to keep players at it by giving them tons of choices, harsh penalties could partially work against that.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookkeeper_Jay View Post
You get deleted.
Fix'd.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
Okay, let's just remove death from the game completely, so the game will never be slowed down.

If penalties for dying are such a bad thing, let's remove the penalty of not being able to act while you're dead too.

If you get down to 0 HP, your health and end refill automatically, just as though you'd been rezzed by an empath on the spot. No one ever dies again, and everyone is happy...except for the people who have and use their enemy affecting rez powers.

I know, a pop up that asks you if you WANT to be defeated! That would work great! That way the people who want to use RotP or Soul transfer still get to, and the people that want no penalties to apply don't ever have to die!

And, no, I'm not actually serious about this.
I think the death penalty we have is fine as is.


Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
Okay, let's just remove death from the game completely, so the game will never be slowed down.

If penalties for dying are such a bad thing, let's remove the penalty of not being able to act while you're dead too.

If you get down to 0 HP, your health and end refill automatically, just as though you'd been rezzed by an empath on the spot. No one ever dies again, and everyone is happy...except for the people who have and use their enemy affecting rez powers.

I know, a pop up that asks you if you WANT to be defeated! That would work great! That way the people who want to use RotP or Soul transfer still get to, and the people that want no penalties to apply don't ever have to die!

And, no, I'm not actually serious about this.
Reductio ad absurdum much?


Let's Dance!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Girl View Post
What exactly is the point of this discussion?
That failing hurts your butt?


 

Posted

Note: I never said I WANTED harsher penalties for dying, just that if one had to happen, I would be okay with the one I outlined.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Familia View Post
I think the death penalty we have is fine as is.
Amen


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zwillinger View Post
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon View Post
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
Why would it be such a horrible thing to add a 10% damage debuff that only applies when you use a wakie, lasts for 2 minutes, and can be easily circumvented by using a single red inspiration?

It's barely more than we have now. Since you only replied to the one sentence, I get the feeling you stopped reading my post right there.
Why does the death penalty need to increase? You say yourself it's barely more than what we have, so what does this achieve?


Quote:
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU View Post
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dispari View Post
Why does the death penalty need to increase? You say yourself it's barely more than what we have, so what does this achieve?
It would reduce stress on servers by reducing player load...


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dispari View Post
Why does the death penalty need to increase? You say yourself it's barely more than what we have, so what does this achieve?
I'll preface this with a "I AM NOT ADVOCATING A CHANGE TO THE DEATH PENALTY HERE" statement, even though it'll be ignored, taken out of any quotes, or even edited to remove the "not" in the grand tradition that is gaming forum debate.


A more daunting death penalty can add certain elements to play. When the death penalty is so trivial that a "reload, run back, keep fighting" zerg mentality presides, then the game loses many opportunities for play around the "desperate struggle to stay alive." When death is trivial, you fight until your health bar goes black and you die. If teammates (or yourself) can keep it from going black, all the better. If not... eh, no big deal.

When death has substantial penalty, then you have to start weighing your choices. How much damage can the enemy deliver before I can react? When I'm below that number, how do I disengage? CAN I disengage, or am I still the most survivable person in the team against this foe? What other mitigation techniques are at my disposal?

All that is on top of all the normal DPS and tanking considerations, and all that has the POTENTIAL for more varied gameplay... if the mechanics support it.

City of Heroes mechanics, particularly the large-team high-level play, does not, so a higher penalty should be avoided.

That struggle can be a fun adrenaline rush if the game's mechanics support it. CoH's mechanics do not, particularly in the large-group and high level game.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase_Arcanum View Post
A more daunting death penalty can add certain elements to play. When the death penalty is so trivial that a "reload, run back, keep fighting" zerg mentality presides, then the game loses many opportunities for play around the "desperate struggle to stay alive." When death is trivial, you fight until your health bar goes black and you die. If teammates (or yourself) can keep it from going black, all the better. If not... eh, no big deal.
Since someone earlier was asking why MMOs don't need to have severe death penalties, I'll fill in on another reason based on this paragraph.

Different powersets, and different archetypes, have varying predispositions for dying. Meaning, severe death penalties would hurt (and discourage) Blasters far more than it would Tankers. It would also discourage powersets like Fire Armor, which is designed to not be super tough, but just resurrect when you die. It would also more greatly value the ability to resurrect people or keep them from dying in the first place, which would put a heavier emphasis on the classic "tank-healer-DPS" mold that we want to keep out of our game, and let people continue to keep playing whatever they feel like.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU View Post
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase_Arcanum View Post
That struggle can be a fun adrenaline rush if the game's mechanics support it. CoH's mechanics do not, particularly in the large-group and high level game.
Can be, but isn't always. That's the divergence point that opinions seem to clash around - not everyone wants an adrenaline rush, or indeed a game that forces you to be cautious. I'm not saying that those who do are wrong in their preferences. To each their own. But I AM saying that those who DON'T want an adrenaline rush or tactical combat aren't somehow wrong, or worse gamers for it. I'm not saying you said that, but this is a prevalent point of view I'm seeing here. "If there's no penalty for dying, then why play?" Really, because I like winning.

Personally, I like games that allow me to be stupid. That's what makes them fun. The more careful I have to be, the more I have to weigh my options and plan ahead, the less... Enthusiastic the game becomes. I WANT to leap from the tops of tall buildings and plummet half a mile down. I WANT to leap into a giant melee without doing inventory. I WANT to throw my guns in the air and catch them before firing a shot. I want to do all the crazy, wild and absurd things super heroes do, because that's what makes the game fun. If I'm forced to watch my every step, then I'm disinclined to have fun, and instead encouraged - well, forced really - to work.

For those who like the thrill of the chase, and for those who like calculated strategies, more danger and more penalty would be great, I'm sure. I have no beef with preference. But for me, the less the consequences, the more I'm going to chance things even if there's no reason to do so. I don't want to be afraid in my games. That's one reason I don't do well at survival horror.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
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.