Mordecai said: I just find the KS as a wearisome thing to argue. I understand not everyone has played EQ1, but like Brad and the VR team have said, reputation is huge in a game like this. If you’re going to be a dbag and KS someone you will feel a penalty socially, especially if it’s a regular basis type thing. MDD in my own opinion is a good thing. Especially when the core of this game is grouping with other players. FTE like was stated earlier in this thread dumbs things down to the point where you really don’t need anybody else to level. I know based off my experience in EQ, I know it’s not the same game, there had been times where a higher level player or group who happened to be running by me and my group waited until we were over the 50% and helped kill the named for us saving time. I’ve also had the occasional KSer and pissed me off. But it wasn’t something that happened ALL the time. Just my two cents
It's yet another thing being completely blown out of proportion by people who in turn want to neuter the game to cater to their fears.
I hadnt really done the math. I was just spitballing an idea. In my mind it was working like a nested Statement. So ya the guy that is trolling your group does FTE and now you have to do 75% to take back the mob or you are FTE and you need only 51% or whatever numbers seem fair. Its just a thought From my past experiences the few times FTE was ever an issue was when someone steamrolled you. And you would let them take it if they could. Cause you arent going to help someone that steamrolls you. Now in current open world if you are FTE they only need to out nuke you by 2% which can be as little as 1 hit sometimes. But if there is a FTE mechanic in place they now have to beat you out by not just 51% but they now have to beat you out by getting 75% thats another story. Thats alot harder to do if you already have done 25%. It would pretty much assure FTE would get loot unless you either suck or are so low of level you cant manage 25%. Its not a perfect formula but its a start of a discussion on a different way to allocate percentages. I was just thinking of those random times when you have a group and some random wizard just wanders in and starts nuking on your mobs and gets your loot. The real solution is to lower the reward so people dont risk it. If loot is only marginally good and there is plenty of it spread through many different zones then ya they wont risk a bad rep for a +1 wis staff. Now a +15..... thats another thing. And also lets not discount the perception flagging after killing a mob as an mechanic. You may have to backtrack and find the quest giver but you should be getting any sort of flag if your perception is leveled high enough. Thats the key to the 1 hit for quest reward scenario.
First off, I am going to go out on a limb here and say that Open Tagging (where everyone gets exp and loot) of any level is not likely to ever make it into Pantheon. So for those who are trying to champion it, I don't think you're gonna have success.
Second off, all the other options such as FTE (First to Engage), MDD (Most Damage Done), MPP (Most Players Present) all have some way that Kill Stealing could still happen. But whatever they choose to go with, the community will need to figure out how to deal with any kill stealing that does occur. These things do have a way of working themselves out.
Some of you have said things such as
Philo said: Kill Stealing was simply never a major issue.
Porygon said: you won't see 'killstealing death squads' of 6 rogues... that just doesnt happen.
Both of these statements are simply based on your personal experiences. These are both false statements because on some servers yes Kill stealing was a major issue. And yes on some servers there were 'kill stealing death squads' (maybe wizards not rogues) that showed up to steal your bosses. In the early days of EQ1 Raids didn't have raid wide credit for damage and it was based on each sole group of 6 players. If the group of 6 players who got Most Damage Done was in the raid, then the raid got the loot. But if the group of 6 were not in the raid, the raid didn't get the loot. So 1 group of 6 wizards could essentially steal the kill of a boss from 72 Raiders because these particular 6 wizards were stacked with gear and could out dps any other group no matter the makeup. And yes it did happen.
So saying it didn't happen simply because you didn't see it happen yourself is not productive.
I do hope that VR will have some sort of features in place to help us the community deal with these kinds of things when they happen and I also hope that this kind of Kill Stealing will be against a Play Nice Policy so that blatant 'kill stealing' of named mobs by stacking a group for the sole purpose of swooping in to out damage a group will actually be banned for that action. I do understand the 'Every mob is free for any to engage' but there is some behaviour that falls into the 'intentional griefing' that should have some rules against it.
As for random kill stealing when your farming experience, this I think will find a way of sorting itself out rather quickly. People will very quickly learn the etiquette for what you can and can't do to enage mobs other players are fighting. Yes there will be morons who never learn, but generally most people will figure it out. Each server will probably have a slightly different way of dealing with it and it may evolve as time goes on. As long as everyone knows how things work and and as long as there are some GM Policies that everyone knows about it should all work out no matter which system VR decides to go with.
Just my 2¢ on the topic (I just thought about the fact that in Canada we don't have pennies any more so you can't actually give anyone 2¢ anymore haha... I guess it would have to be a digital transfer :-)
I think #2 (Whoever lands the killing blow) creates the most drama, and fun I've ever seen from a loot system in an MMO.
Dark Age of Camelot behaved this way, and there would be sneaky stealthers attempting to snipe raid bosses, and teams assigned to look out for the stealthers..
But I don't think it's feasible in a modern MMO. Hopefully it's not #3 which is the trend of most MMO's, and the path modern WoW has taken. It's very gross.
Out of all the systems i think the 51% and no FTE flagging is the most fair. And implement play nice policies to counter blatant KSing. Now that being said... they can implement special rules for special events or bosses if they wanted to. Its not competely out of scope to lock named into FTE flagging especially if they are random spawn and roam large areas. It might be a long pull to group and you dont want people stealing your pull kind of thing. The most obvious use of this is a quest triggered mob so that the person that triggered the quest gets the FTE flag and he gets the loot regardless
kreed99 said: Out of all the systems i think the 51% and no FTE flagging is the most fair. And implement play nice policies to counter blatant KSing. Now that being said... they can implement special rules for special events or bosses if they wanted to. Its not competely out of scope to lock named into FTE flagging especially if they are random spawn and roam large areas. It might be a long pull to group and you dont want people stealing your pull kind of thing
Play Nice policies are one of the few things that should be left in the ash heap of MMO history.
Telling GM's or CSR's to enforce rather arbitrary and subjective rules. (We called this lawyer quest back in EQ)
You'll end up with competing raid guilds petitioning each other endlessly to get the other banned, and people circumventing the rules in very unfun ways. FTE leads to guilds engaging bosses, and kiting it for minutes/hours until they have assembled a large enough raid force to fight it, etc.
One other thing to keep in mind when you are talking about First to Engage is how this is effected by the way Feign Death works in the game. If we have Feign Death keeping you on an 'Agro table' for a mob until it totally resets so that it will turn back to you as soon as you stand up... How would this play into First to Engage. Say the Monk runs over and agro's a Huge number of mobs and runs across the zone and Feign Deaths. Those mobs start wandering back across the zone to their spawn point. Along the way various groups pick off those mobs and kill them only to find they don't get credit for the exp or loot because that Feign Death Monk is still considered the 'First to Engage' because that mob had not made it back to the spawn point and reset it's Agro table.
Or does the Monk get taken off the FTE list as soon as he Feigns Death? Does he go back onto FTE each time he stands up and re-agro's or does the mob actually have to reach him before he's on the FTE?
This also plays into not being able to clean up a train that some poor sap runs near you. If he's FTE then what is the incentive for any group to help him out by grabbing those mobs and killing them. They do all the work to save his butt and he gets all the exp and loot.
This is why it was mentioned that this kind of thing can't just be changed at the last minute but rather plays a big part in how other things are balanced within the game. If VR balances things around MDD and then switches to FTE at the last minute, it can throw off the dynamic of how the game is played rather largely.
Porygon said:dorotea said:But the traditional definition of killstealing is taking a mob away from someone that pulled it and is fignting it by doing more damage to the mob. By definition the puller CANT be the killstealer
You're camping a named. I come to your camp. Watch you kill the ph, then time my attack so it hits when the names spawns (therefore attacking it first)and I kill said named doing more damage than you.
Most people would file this under kill stealing.
This can only be considered Kill Stealing if VR desides to recognize "camps" and if they do that it opens a much larger can of worms. (As defined in another thread)
What's a camp?
What mob(s) are in each camp?
How long can one hold a camp?
What causes one to lose a camp?
Does one need to kill surrounding mobs for a defined "camp" or can they just kill the PH and leave the rest (but nobody else can kill them becouse they belong to "the" camp?
WHO decides what mobs belong to what camp? You? Me? VR going to mark them with chalk on the floor?
This list could go on and on!
With FTE and unrecognized camps there can be no Kill Stealing.
With MDD there will be KSing! I don't believe it will be a problem.. but it will happen. It will happen to me. It has in EQ, once or twice... it won't be a big deal to me. I think more often it might help me meet some new friends as WE group up to help be sure WE don't get KS'ed
kreed99 said:This completely what if here, but What If: First to engage only needs to get 51% of the damage dealt to get the exp and loot and any group that trys to steal the kill must meet a 75% damage dealt percentage to steal the kill and get the exp/loot. Or some other higher percentage limitation. This way you can still help people that pull trains, but you won't get the recongnition for the kill unless you bypass a higher % standard. And this way if the FTE group dies then the percentage drops back down to 51% damage split between any competing groups.
Its kindof a hybrid idea. And totally what if'ing here.
This is an innovative idea, but it too can go wrong. If you are camping a named solo for a long time and someone shows up and gets first hit on the named, then you would have an uphill battle to get what should be yours from holding the camp.
Zorkon said:Porygon said:dorotea said:But the traditional definition of killstealing is taking a mob away from someone that pulled it and is fignting it by doing more damage to the mob. By definition the puller CANT be the killstealer
You're camping a named. I come to your camp. Watch you kill the ph, then time my attack so it hits when the names spawns (therefore attacking it first)and I kill said named doing more damage than you.
Most people would file this under kill stealing.
This can only be considered Kill Stealing if VR desides to recognize "camps" and if they do that it opens a much larger can of worms. (As defined in another thread)
I'm aware of this. I was responding to a very specific quote.
GoofyWarriorGuy said:Porygon said: you won't see 'killstealing death squads' of 6 rogues... that just doesnt happen.
Both of these statements are simply based on your personal experiences. These are both false statements because on some servers yes Kill stealing was a major issue. And yes on some servers there were 'kill stealing death squads' (maybe wizards not rogues) that showed up to steal your bosses. In the early days of EQ1 Raids didn't have raid wide credit for damage and it was based on each sole group of 6 players. If the group of 6 players who got Most Damage Done was in the raid, then the raid got the loot. But if the group of 6 were not in the raid, the raid didn't get the loot. So 1 group of 6 wizards could essentially steal the kill of a boss from 72 Raiders because these particular 6 wizards were stacked with gear and could out dps any other group no matter the makeup. And yes it did happen.
/sigh
My favorite thing, is when you make a statement that is true about 99% of a game, but that 1 person wants to come in and give you a history lesson assuming you didnt know...
Next you're going to tell me taurens had plainsrunning...
Look man. I know how early raids worked. I specifically picked "rogues" because I knew if I said "wizards" someone would bring this up. This issue was fixed when raid groups were made. Theres 0 reason to bring it up.
Also, theres a simple tactic to deal with this... called.dont tank... you let the wizards pull aggro and they die. It's one of the most common strategies when competing against another raid group.. you let them tank so your tanks and healers can dps.
If every class had the ability to do equal damage, then I would agree that most damage done = who gets credit for the kill. Mind you I do not want to see this happen. I do not want a tank to deal as much damage as a pure DPS class.
However, I am 99% positive that is not the case (that all classes can do the same damage). I main a Tank in every MMORPG that I have played. If anybody has ever wanted to out DPS me, they would not have a problem. If a contested mob spawns I have 1 of 2 options (as a tank): Either get a friend to help DPS or wait till everybody else gets what they need. While many people would say getting a friend is part of the community building aspect, what about the other person who can take the kill from that solo person? They need only themself, while others need a group. Building a community because 1 class can beat others in a DPS race means people willl select that 1 class over others (for DPS) because they can win the spawns needed for their quest / item / etc.
While I am not for 1st to tag systems, I am not for a DPS race to kill the mob either. Where is the balance for the two? The only systems that I can think of are who hit the mob first or who has dealth the most damage. I am not sure what other systems could be implemented, of course, that is whare I hope the devs are smarter then I am.
Chogar said:If every class had the ability to do equal damage, then I would agree that most damage done = who gets credit for the kill. Mind you I do not want to see this happen. I do not want a tank to deal as much damage as a pure DPS class.
However, I am 99% positive that is not the case (that all classes can do the same damage). I main a Tank in every MMORPG that I have played. If anybody has ever wanted to out DPS me, they would not have a problem. If a contested mob spawns I have 1 of 2 options (as a tank): Either get a friend to help DPS or wait till everybody else gets what they need. While many people would say getting a friend is part of the community building aspect, what about the other person who can take the kill from that solo person? They need only themself, while others need a group. Building a community because 1 class can beat others in a DPS race means people willl select that 1 class over others (for DPS) because they can win the spawns needed for their quest / item / etc.
While I am not for 1st to tag systems, I am not for a DPS race to kill the mob either. Where is the balance for the two? The only systems that I can think of are who hit the mob first or who has dealth the most damage. I am not sure what other systems could be implemented, of course, that is whare I hope the devs are smarter then I am.
Why are you expecting to solo content as a tank?
And, once again, this kill stealing issue is being blown so far out of proportion it's insane.
You know, I feel like I say this every time this topic comes up - but we should all keep in mind that our previous experiences with various "kill claim" systems will vary. Over the last couple of years I've heard horror stories from people about players setting up to tag contested mobs in first-to-engage games, and then kiting those around until their group could arrive (just as one example). I myself have *never* experienced that sort of thing, but too many people have expressed concern about it for me to dismiss it. People wouldn't bring it up if it hadn't happened, frequently.
The same goes for systems where kill cliams are determined by some "damage done" formula. Some people have been lucky enough to not run into problems with rampant killstealing - others have. Heck, in EQ in Kunark we used to run into people doing it every week on the Nameless. Other people's mileage might have varied. But it was real all the same.
All this is to say that none of us should be dismissing the concerns that others have, even if we don't share their experiences. We should accept that these concerns are valid, that these things can and do happen, and regardless of the method Pantheon ends up using, we should recognize that at some point there will be bad players who try to do bad things.
My point is that no system is going to be perfect, and I feel like it's a waste of time for any of us to tell each other that we're wrong. Because none of us are wrong and everyone's concerns are justified. I feel confident in saying this because I've played games with lots of different systems and every single one of those games had problems with players who found ways to exploit the system and cheat other players out of kills somehow. Every single one.
Anyway, where I stand. I prefer a hybrid system:
- Kill claim is determined by player/group contribution (this doesn't just include damage done, but other factors such as hate generated, (actual) healing done, and so on
- The system is weighted so that first to engage counts extra, to help cut down on classic killstealing.
- Characters that are too far above or below the level of the mob/encounter, or who are too far from the fight, or not actively on the mob's hate list are not included in the calculation, to help eliminate bottom-feeding and power-leveling scenarios, as well as potential exploits.
- "Trivial Loot Code" is in effect for named/boss mobs.
- Triggered encounters may use a different formula based on the person/group who initiates the trigger, rather than whoever tags first or does the most damage.
It's not perfect, but I feel like something along these lines does the most to help mitigate all of the very real concerns everyone has.
Either way, I think the best thing we can do is make sure we give lots of feedback to the devs once alpha/beta open up. Because let's be honest, a lot of things can generally be mitigated by better zone and encounter design as well. People are far less likely to killsteal a boss if they don't have to wait 8 hours for the next possible spawn to occur (and hope it's not a placeholder). If we build a game with that level of competition involved, we should just expect people to be jerks about things, right off the bat. After all, we've had at least 15 years now of games teaching eveyrone that they're entitled to everything and that when something is contested, might makes right. We can't expect people to behave like it's 1999 anymore.
That's my somewhat cyncial $0.02
Nephele said: let's be honest, a lot of things can generally be mitigated by better zone and encounter design as well. People are far less likely to killsteal a boss if they don't have to wait 8 hours for the next possible spawn to occur (and hope it's not a placeholder).
This is one of the best points made in this thread... Most KS'ing occurs because people are fighting over a very rare resource (ie the spawned Named target). If things were designed so everyone would be able to get a chance at this target in a reasonable time frame without needing to steal it from another group, most kill stealing will never occur. I know there are several ways to do this, and I know most people hate the idea of lockouts (ie you kill a boss once and then are not eligable to fight it again for a set amount of time), so I wonder how VR could do this without relying on any type of Lockout.
What if kill credit was awarded by Kill Contribution points rather than just damage? The kill would combine Agro points, Damage taken, damage healed and damage dealt in that order of precedence while the mob was aggroed. Basically it will shift the kill credit from being all on the DPS to being mostly on the Tank and Healer. After all the tank and the healer are truly the ones that enabled it to be killed. You could even set it that only 10% of the DPS and healing would be counted if you are not in the group/raid with the character who has agro.
There is still the chance of one group taking a mob from another group during the pull phase but once its in the group and agro has been established its not really possible to KS. Even a high level one-shoting a mob pulled by a low level group may not swing the kill credit if only 10% is given to them. It opens some different power leveling mechanics but that is not necessarily bad if the low levels still need to pull and tank the targets to get credit.
How about this:
If, after bringing a mob down to below 80% hp, one player or group is the only player/group to engage the mob, then that player/group is automatically given looting rights. Otherwise, rights are based on MDD.
It still allows competition if groups choose to fight over a spawn. It prevents (to a large degree) situations where balanced group with lower DPS establishes agro, and a couple of high DPS players come in and try to burn down the mob to steal credit. It also prevents "sniping" or "tagging" a boss with 1 hit and letting another group take the agro, as would be the case in a pure first damage done system. It would also give friendly players/groups the freedom to assist a group (once that group has established the looting rights) with a boss without any suspicion from that group or self-worry about kill-stealing.
To me, this is simpler than using a formula that tries to take into account threat and healing and damage. If you can do 20% damage before anyone else, it's yours. Otherwise, better have the most damage.
zoltar said:To me, this is simpler than using a formula that tries to take into account threat and healing and damage. If you can do 20% damage before anyone else, it's yours. Otherwise, better have the most damage.
Its really just the agro meter, assuming tanks get some agro for having the guts to take a hit and not die. 20% is honestly easier to game the system on than 51% as I am guessing that at a certain level difference long cast nukes will be able to do 20% in one hit.
>You're camping a named. I come to your camp. Watch you kill the ph, then time my attack so it hits when the names spawns (therefore attacking it first)and I kill said named doing more damage than you.
Most people would file this under kill stealing.<
This is why we seem to disagree so strongly on this point. We have been using the same term in *very* different ways. Perhaps because your MMO background includes EQ and focuses on the importance of camping and getting named mobs and my MMO background, although it goes back to the MUDs, does not include EQ and focuses more on camping trash for a lot of kills and drops not one kill and a special drop. Although, of course, there were named mobs and there were special drops. This just wasn't quite as much the focus of the game as it seems to have been in EQ.
In the games I have played killstealing has almost universally been used for someone that takes away a mob that someone else is already engaged with. Usually when the game used MDD as a system. Games where the puller got permanent rights to the mob (unless he or she died or the mob went back to its spawn point) did not have killstealing by this definition - it was impossible. Barring a case where the puller did no damage (mob evaded the attack) and someone else did damage before the puller did damage. If someone camped a name and some rude person or group came in and took the name when it spawned we called campstealing. And in general communities hated campstealers.
So let us start over here. MDD is a better system for minimizing *campstealing* - using my definition not yours to try and clarify why I have been taking the positions I have.
First to engage is a better system for minimizing *killstealing* since it essentially prevents it. MDD allows killstealing.
If Pantheon places a large importance on "kill 10 spiders" or "kill the large spider over that hill" quests MDD can be a nightmare for at-level pullers when higher levels grab the spiders and outdamage them. And there will clearly be some of this in Pantheon although less than in many MMOs.
If Pantheon places a large importance on camping a named and getting its drops - first to engage can be a nightmare when someone else swoops in and engages. Not as bas as you say since if a solo swoops in the group can just let the mob kill it and then attack it themselves but bad enough.
To me with my background killing trash mobs for kill experience and quest experience is crucial - killing the occasional named is nice but doesn't really matter that much. Any drop will be outleveled quickly enough - typically a level 20 drop will be useless by level 25 so even with slow leveling it isn't worth that much effort or aggravation.
So in summary I think MDD *is* a better system if camping nameds is more important than killing landscape mobs, but first-to-engage is a better system for doing quests and killing trash.
I think everyone who tags a mob (or at least does significant damage) is a fair system for quest mobs and perhaps landscape mobs but a truly terrible system for the named you need to camp for hours.
Some of this debate isn't because some of us have ...strange ... views on how the different mechanics work. It is because we use the term killstealing *very* differently because games we played used the terms very differently than in EQ and because we focus on different elements of Pantheon which *will* have quests and killing of landscape mobs as well as camping nameds.
Porygon said:Zorkon said:Porygon said:dorotea said:But the traditional definition of killstealing is taking a mob away from someone that pulled it and is fignting it by doing more damage to the mob. By definition the puller CANT be the killstealer
You're camping a named. I come to your camp. Watch you kill the ph, then time my attack so it hits when the names spawns (therefore attacking it first)and I kill said named doing more damage than you.
Most people would file this under kill stealing.
This can only be considered Kill Stealing if VR desides to recognize "camps" and if they do that it opens a much larger can of worms. (As defined in another thread)
I'm aware of this. I was responding to a very specific quote.
Yes and you responded to the quote in the name of "most people" you sir are not "most people" and you do not speak for most people... when you do I will feel obliged to speak up for THIS person and correct you.
I have never seen a kill stealing situation resolved to the satisfaction of all parties EXCEPT where one party agrees to leave to go for another camp/mob that also fulfills their goals. I think the VR devs should consider as often as possible "if a KSer/griefer/trainer is bothering group X at location Y, are there adequate alternatives for them to pursue?"
If players are intended be fighting each other for resources, then the game should be made PvP and balanced accordingly. FTE vs. MDD vs. Alternative systems only matters when players are fighting over resources and it doesn't matter what system you choose - there will be conflict, winners, and losers if players are competing *against each other* for resources. I'm really hoping that players in Pantheon will be allowed to compete *against the environment* for resources, rather than relying on other players to provide challenge in the unbalanced pseudo PvP we have seen in other games.
Trasak said:zoltar said:To me, this is simpler than using a formula that tries to take into account threat and healing and damage. If you can do 20% damage before anyone else, it's yours. Otherwise, better have the most damage.
Its really just the agro meter, assuming tanks get some agro for having the guts to take a hit and not die. 20% is honestly easier to game the system on than 51% as I am guessing that at a certain level difference long cast nukes will be able to do 20% in one hit.
If you're sitting back, nuking mobs for 20% HP from a distance before anyone else agro's them
I don't see how that is gaming the system. If you can do a fifth of the damage before anyone else, either it's a trivial mob (in which case you could easily burn it down ) or you've had a decent head start on everyone else (i.e. working as intended)