Orrery

I was thinking... When Pking at Orrery, why not have it the same as a Lesser. Assistance in killing a player gives others xp for helping why not the same for Orrery. I think this will bring more people to fight.
OonaghIazamatVyxsisLeanaDarim
«13

Comments

  • I think one of the draw backs to the Orrery is the xp lost upon death. With the new changes to xp loss, it does not take much to hurt from the Orrery. But I think if this was implemented it would make up for a bit of that loss and even things out. Make more want to come if they can not hurt so bad from deaths.
    TybereusLeana
  • I agree. All large scale conflict needs to work the way Foci currently do.
  • TeaniTeani Shadow Mistress Sweden
    @Iazamat, you mean with few, if any, consequences?

    @Tybereus, I think assist xp would be a good idea. 



    LeanaFezzixZaila
  • VyxsisVyxsis Vyxsis
    yeah, i don't *love* losing xp or anything, but i'd rather not move to a system where there were few, if any, consequences. xp loss feels like it's both not especially meaningful yet somehow still frustrating, especially since PVP xp loss is higher than PVE and the higher your level, the more xp 1% actually is. given that the orrery gives very little (if anything) worth having, i think many people conclude it's just a waste unless they're just assured victory because of ridiculously stacked numbers.

    orrery's kinda had a lot of problems since its inception, from what i gather. it's a weird throwback to landmarks, which lots of people never experienced directly and no longer have any real bearing on the game. same with various other 'mass conflict' avenues - why bother fighting in the Shattered Vortex? or the Iernian Fracture? i mean, i do both from time to time, but that's just because i would wouldn't i. the orrery rewards you with... ok, slightly better sip half the time isn't too bad. what else though? every four hours, it wastes anabiotic with a stat boost that lasts 5 minutes - when are you ever gonna get use out of that? 5% bonus to audit for the least widely available damage types in the game? ok, thanks...

    like, unless you just love group pvp or feel certain you're gonna win, i can see why people wouldn't bother at all just based on a loose cost-benefit analysis.
    Indoran'i is back baby. It's good again. Awoouu (wolf Howl)
    An Atzob cultist says, "Is a shamatato as tasty as a potato?"
    (Tells): From afar, Mephistoles hisses harshly to you, "Hey baby, show me your ovipositor?"
    The mighty Jy'Barrak Golgotha opens his maw, catches the glowing spear in his many jagged teeth, and chomps down. The Divine spear breaks with a noise like thunder, shards toppling from the Emperor's jaws. "OM NOM NOM!" He declares, then spits the last of the ruined weapon from his lips.




    ZailaTybereus
  • VyxsisVyxsis Vyxsis
    er, i meant to say somewhere in there that making XP shared seems fine and also good to me. always seems weird to me that maybe you did most of the heavy lifting to kill a target, but because someone suddenly rolled in and finished them, you'd get nothing. again, the cost-benefit ratio is awful if you can easily lose tons of xp without a decent chance at gaining.
    Indoran'i is back baby. It's good again. Awoouu (wolf Howl)
    An Atzob cultist says, "Is a shamatato as tasty as a potato?"
    (Tells): From afar, Mephistoles hisses harshly to you, "Hey baby, show me your ovipositor?"
    The mighty Jy'Barrak Golgotha opens his maw, catches the glowing spear in his many jagged teeth, and chomps down. The Divine spear breaks with a noise like thunder, shards toppling from the Emperor's jaws. "OM NOM NOM!" He declares, then spits the last of the ruined weapon from his lips.




    Tybereus
  • edited June 2018
    Teani said:

    @Iazamat, you mean with few, if any, consequences?

    @Tybereus, I think assist xp would be a good idea. 

    Sure! I think it's more important to get people involved with the only consequence being the overall loss (of the conflict and of resources other than exp). Aetolia's fostered a mindset that exp matters and I don't think that's going to change. I'd rather we learn to work with that than continue to pretend that's not the case. I know that I'm personally more involved in ylem conflict with its current setup than I would be otherwise.

    Edit: To add, I really think bonuses for the winning side are much, much better for everyone involved than a slew of consequences for the losing side, which the game's gotten fairly decent at. In my 15 years playing Aetolia, numerous people have rallied for consequences of varying natures whenever conflict has been discussed, but the results indicate that very few players, if any, actually want to deal with those consequences. What most want are consequences for the other side of the game, because we all selfishly derive enjoyment from our "enemies" having their fun ruined, even if we wouldn't admit that. So, yah! More conflict systems with the Foci setup (aura = no loss of exp, shared exp gain) would be more beneficial in the long run.
  • TeaniTeani Shadow Mistress Sweden
    All I have to say about that is please, please, please don't remove more consequences in this game. 



    FezzixZaila
  • We've derailed from the original point of this thread, but if anyone wants to discuss it further, feel free to either PM me or start a new thread! I feel like I've explained myself well enough, but I'm willing to elaborate further!
  • TeaniTeani Shadow Mistress Sweden
    It is not quite derailed. Making all larger fights like Lessers will remove consequences of fighting, and I, for one, would prefer if those were not removed. It is enough that Lessers exist as a way to get into combat practice, but other kinds of fighting should have some consequences. (I would really like it if there were consequences available for other things too, for RP purposes and such, but that would really be to derail)

    When it comes to assists, however, Orrery could definitely benefit from those, as it is usually a group thing, and would encourage people to move to the next step up in fighting. Eventually they might move to more Arena fights, and later on... perhaps duels. I remember some truly epic duels being fought at North of Trees.

    There should be a natural progression in this, but I really don't like the notion of removing consequences. Disappointment is part of it all, and if you can't handle it, get better or learn how to handle a loss.

    Lessers - group fighting, consequence free
    Orrery - group fighting, some consequences (less with assist gain)
    Sect - single fighting, consequence free
    Duel - single fighting, larger consequences.



  • The consequence is the death screen we have to sit through, knowing we lost.
  • EliadonEliadon Somewhere Over the Rainbow
    edited June 2018
    Mmm, even if there was no exp loss, there are still consequences.

    Not getting the buffs from the Orrery.

    And if that isn't consequence enough, then why bother fighting over it at all?
    IazamatOonaghKalak
  • I am ok with the xp loss if the xp were to be shared for kills. As it stands now it is a lose lose situation with losing xp for the death and not gaining any for the assist. I do think they need to keep the Orrery different than foci. Just give us a shared xp gain if we assist in the kill. That would help to even out what is lost in death. The Orrery lasts for so long now, you can die quite a bit during one Orrery event and if you are taking 1% of xp each death that is going to add up quickly.
    TeaniTybereus
  • Teani said:



    Lessers - group fighting, consequence free
    Orrery - group fighting, some consequences (less with assist gain)
    Sect - single fighting, consequence free some consequences (half exp loss)
    Duel - single fighting, larger consequences.

    Fixed that for you.

    If the consequences are too adverse, people will stop going. A lot of people want to help but only one can get the kill. A less experienced and weaker player will die way more than the buff artifact players. They also get little help getting that back if they never land a killing blow.

    Shared exp will mitigate that issue. There's already an aura (debuff) to facilitate that, though I don't know how the code works.


    Alathesia
  • TeaniTeani Shadow Mistress Sweden
    True, it's half xp loss for Sect. I'm fine with that kind of progression, though.

    Also please note that I am all for the shared assist xp for Orrery. I just don't think it should be completely like Lessers. 



    Alathesia
  • RhyotRhyot Bloodloch
    I haven't participated in the Orrery for quite some time now because I think the "perks" it gives for winning is absolute poppycock. It's pathetic at best and @Vyxsis nailed it on the head with what they are and how pathetic they are.

    Additionally, I will -NEVER- go to the Orrery now because of xp loss. 1% for me takes 5-6 hours to get back (Coincidentally, its also why I don't do the Sect anymore either because I'm still lose 3-4 hours of work). I might be somewhat of a masochist to continue bashing at level 206, but its what I enjoy and I'm sorry, but I'm not going to slit my wrist and lose 6 hours of work just so I can get some 5% audit or maybe a slightly better sip rate.

    If you want people to attend the Orrery more, here's a few ideas:

    - Make it an aura'd area where you share xp and don't lose xp
    - Increase the buffs you get from winning ie..
    - Remove the shadow/spirit audit and make it a flat 10% audit gain across the board
    - Change the noon/midnight buffs to last for 2 hours instead of 5 minutes.
    - Sip changes to last during both day AND night (regardless of tether) with an increased effectiveness during
    chosen sides time


    Side topic: People are always fucking bitching about wanting consequences. The most recent change for that was making death cost your first born son. Congrats! Should there be consequences for things, absolutely. But making consequences for something that is meant to be a group related mindset is childish and selfish. If you want consequences, you shouldn't get to pick and choose what gets consequences and what doesn't. The "squeaky wheels" got huge xp loss hits for PVP and PVE when dying. Ok, cool. I would like to see consequences for fishing, hours upon hours of roleplay, and extended idling times. Again, you can't preach about wanting consequences if it is only done to benefit you.


    TL;DR: Buff benefits of orrery, make it a aura'd area like lessers, and ignore the people wanting "consequences"


    IazamatKalakMjollAlathesiaTybereusEliadon
  • edited June 2018
    I agree with shared xp too. Anyways...

    Perhaps this will be a long discourse on the topic, but without some comparisons we cannot see the whole picture.

    To make a comparison, MKO was the IRE game which had the least PvP barrier (you could even PK with one skillset alone in some classes and there were no PvP barrier-padding like resistance miniskills) and possessed no XP loss for PvP deaths. The curing system did not even have curatives so it was quite on the gentle side with resources to participate in PvE and PvP activities too.

    But in the long run it did not magically increase or decrease the participation. People would still get angry when they were killed and this lack of consequence to PvP made people uncaring about the death in the game.

    Personally I found it amusing a good deal of players in the game play "brave" characters when there was no consequence to their actions. A non-com would call you coward and give you enough reasons to kill them...and when you kill them...they would laugh at you again (I like to call that "Brave Non-Com Syndrome") Because why not? You have just dealt them 1-2 minutes of AFKness and killing someone repeatedly was frowned upon in MKO too.

    Now here, the root problem I observe is not the loss of xp but rather the lack of drive beneath the current conflicts. I have participated in enough lessers to date to lose interest in them, but at first I was envisioning them as disrupting key operations of the enemy. A conflict of interest. But then it was pointed out participating in them really is not a big deal and it is more then enough to keep ylem reserves of a city with PvE/less-lethal methods. So why participate in any battle if they are devoid of a driving reason? Why my character should care about lessers or Orrery when they are not crucial to an advantage or disadvantage? They felt now like minigames, like Sect of Blades...fairly detached from PvE and gameworld.

    Side note: Also aura is in my opinion a very outlandish and unfitting mechanic "Oh his aura dropped...we should not kill him now!" I found that always OOC. In a war-scenario, you would do pre-emptive strikes and chases. Playing around aura rules is not-fun and that is RPly unsound.

    Some Spicy Solutions

    1. Untethering Conflicts

    Currently tether mechanics cause the occurrence of natural alliances between Bloodloch-Spinesreach and Duiran-Enorian. As standalone cities they are unable to shine and be responsible for their armies. In my opinion while in tether (grand play side of the game) cities are aligned they should be misaligned in more short-term conflicts. That way, you will have four sides vying for control instead of two sides.

    2. Conquest

    Some Capture the Flag or King of the Hill style PvP events across the world would give people RP reasons to participate in such conflicts. Furthermore these outposts can be placed in less-frequented areas to provide some traffic there. Good folks would not want a Grook village fall into the hands of Spireans who will use the inhabitants as laboratory test subjects, right?

    3. True Zero-Sum Conflicts

    A zero sum game will effectively mean one side's victory is another side's defeat and its consequence will be felt. Lessers are inflationary conflicts in nature, because ylem will accumulate more and more...thus there is no way to deprive another city from their ylem reserves or make them lose on certain buffs. On the other hand a true zero-sum game would put one side more advantageous then the other. Perhaps one side can capture a location which will provide a tithe to the controlling city and make their commodity prices higher for the others. The ideas can be increased with some brainstorming. The main aim is this: Each of the four cities should have either a RP or conflict of interest reason to capture those places or fight in a designated area.
    RhyotTekiasTeaniEliadon
  • RhyotRhyot Bloodloch
    Let's keep this thread to the primary reason it was brought up. The orrery and activity among the orrery. If you want to discuss other mechanics, then make another thread.


    KalakIazamatTeani
  • edited June 2018
    Rhyot said:

    Let's keep this thread to the primary reason it was brought up. The orrery and activity among the orrery. If you want to discuss other mechanics, then make another thread.

    I give a broader perspective and you use your Off-Topic card again. I am sorry but whatever I wrote is related to the very core of this issue.

    PvP XP loss, the reasonings behind conflicts and such, all are related to conflicts such as Orrery.

    Stop being a forum police and instead contribute other then: "I bash nonsensically above lvl 200+ and 1% xp loss is too much for me! Ignore people who want consequences!"
  • EliadonEliadon Somewhere Over the Rainbow
    Rhyot said:


    - Change the noon/midnight buffs to last for 2 hours instead of 5 minutes.

    Two hours might be a SMIDGE too much. With the eq/bal enhance, it's ludicrously opie op for those 5 minutes. ;p

    But yeah, as I mentioned before, if it isn't worth fighting over with the existing XP loss, why bother?
    RhyotFezzixIazamatAlathesia
  • RhyotRhyot Bloodloch
    You're right, Eliadon. 2 hours might be a little excessive for power increase, but I was just giving a number. In reality, that would skew the ability to do other pvp/pve mechanics if it lasted that long.

    At best, I think if it was like 30-45 minutes that would probably a much better benefit than 5 minutes. It would allow you to have better speeds for PVE and if you wanted to PVP, you'd have an edge as well.


  • Was not my intention to say consequences shouldn't be there. I was intending on like shared XP, like @Vyxsis stated a person does all the work and someone else comes in and cleans up and kills target. I'm sorry that doesn't sit well with me. It's like I just got screwed over on a lot of XP that would take me a while to get.
    Mordion
  • Does exp loss post level 100 really bother people? Personally, it doesn't bother me too much but I can see how this would discourage a player who is lower level. If removing the xp loss is all it takes to get more people involved in orrery then I won't complain.
    Unofficial Founder of the Cult of Tiur
  • EliadonEliadon Somewhere Over the Rainbow
    Mordion said:

    Does exp loss post level 100 really bother people? Personally, it doesn't bother me too much but I can see how this would discourage a player who is lower level. If removing the xp loss is all it takes to get more people involved in orrery then I won't complain.

    It bothers specific people, mostly people who care about their level.
  • TiurTiur Producer
    I think the objective of the thread has been met? We agree that the exp should be shared. We will not be removing exp loss or really changing much else, as Orrery is a different animal than foci.
    TeaniMordionOonaghVyxsis
  • @Tiur that is all I was wanting done. I do not think it should be like foci and have consequences, but glad it is seen that the shared xp will pull more to participate. Thank you!
    TeaniMordionVyxsis
  • RhyotRhyot Bloodloch
    I understand that this is necro-ing this thread, but I didn't want to start YET ANOTHER Orrery thread.

    Can we please remove the ability of placing shrines in the mountaintop area, as well as the surrounding rooms leading into the Orrery mountaintop?

    Right now, shrines are being used to passively damage people, passively heal people, and also fast travel into the immediate center to bypass enemy aegis. The Orrery is in no manner, an event that requires Divine attention or assistance. Allowing such gives an unfair advantage to the people who are enemies/allies of the individuals of the order enemies.


    CzciennSeurimasArdentNisavi
  • image

    Memery aside, why can't you just defile the shrine?
    CzciennSeurimas
  • I'm a fan of full-stakes conflicts. I like that Orrery gets all this side play. The whole tether who is on the receiving end of that damage should just band together and defile the offending shrine(s), limited obviously to the folks who are willing to accept the consequences. Action and reaction is where the fun is, though! I smell a holy war in this Orrery :smile:
    Didi has expressed her esteem of you for the following reason: Smart organized leader.
    Experience Gained: 47720 (Special) [total: 2933660]
    Needed for LVL: 122.00775356245
  • RhyotRhyot Bloodloch
    Stine said:
    We have. The problem is that it gets placed right back up and so begins the cycle of shrine down and shrine up.


  • All I have to say is that this is quickly going to become a cycle of escalation: shrine goes up at orrery, shrine gets dusted, person gets hunted into oblivion outside the orrery, slighted tether retaliates and escalates further.

    I'm not really sure this is a cycle either tether wants to be trapped in or perpetuate, so instead of memeing on one another and clicking the LOL react, maybe approach this like adults.
    CzciennArdent
Sign In or Register to comment.