Balancing Non-Consensual PvP

    • Shador wrote:

      Rainphase wrote:

      Balance has been and will keep occurring in the favor of the PvE players who are the ones spending $ for Gold. Which in turn is why many PVP players have left the game and caused massive blobs to form and also why this game will see MASSIVE reductions in player base by the End of 2021 and Beginning of 2022 when new PVP games especially the addition of a couple Full Loot PVP games come out.
      And you say this because you analysed everything as developers do? Or you're just saying to say stuff?
      3.5 years of watching Changes, Gameplay evolving based on changes, Nerfs to specific content etc. Accumulated knowledge. If it smells like shit, loots like shit and feels like shit.. well its probably shit.

      But hey I could be wrong.
    • Rainphase wrote:

      Shador wrote:

      Rainphase wrote:

      Balance has been and will keep occurring in the favor of the PvE players who are the ones spending $ for Gold. Which in turn is why many PVP players have left the game and caused massive blobs to form and also why this game will see MASSIVE reductions in player base by the End of 2021 and Beginning of 2022 when new PVP games especially the addition of a couple Full Loot PVP games come out.
      And you say this because you analysed everything as developers do? Or you're just saying to say stuff?
      3.5 years of watching Changes, Gameplay evolving based on changes, Nerfs to specific content etc. Accumulated knowledge. If it smells like shit, loots like shit and feels like shit.. well its probably shit.
      But hey I could be wrong.
      But you said in other thread that you uninstalled this game, so why do you even care?
      Weird is good.
    • Rainphase is just in denial because he cannot understand that although devs fk up from time to time
      they do change it eventually to ensure the health of the game

      and instead of posting stuff to help fix the game he keeps ranting on how bad the devs fk up without explaining on how to make it better or suggest alternatives

      you just need to understand that balance in this game is based around crystals and corrupted dungeons "mostly"

      In this topic "Balancing Non-Consensual PvP" and consensual PvP

      There has been little to no changes to individual weapons just because of ganking alone. though there were many mechanic nerfs to "ganking itself" via cleanse on dismount and mount changes to allow the running side to have more of an advantage

      also devs also favour people who are passive mostly because there is nothing more fustrating then getting gank and not being able to fight back when transporting.

      thats why devs gave a clutch to passive players and corrupted dungeons and hell gates rework to players who want to have pvp and even turn the yellow and blue zones into a non lethal pvp lagfest with factions warfare.

      although there are many bugs and inequality in the pvp and loot system in hellgates and corrupted dungeons but in my personal opinion it is a step in the right direction for separating consensual and non consensual PVP
      Check out My new Albion Online Expansion idea 4 thread:
      https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/143592-Albion-Online-Expansion-Idea-4/

      The post was edited 2 times, last by The_Support_God ().

    • The_Support_God wrote:

      Rainphase is just in denial because he cannot understand that although devs fk up from time to time
      they do change it eventually to ensure the health of the game

      and instead of posting stuff to help fix the game he keeps ranting on how bad the devs fk up without explaining on how to make it better or suggest alternatives

      you just need to understand that balance in this game especially in this topic "Balancing Non-Consensual PvP" and consensual PvP is based around crystals and corrupted dungeons "mostly"

      There has been little to no changes to individual weapons just because of ganking alone. though there were many mechanic nerfs to "ganking itself" via cleanse on dismount and mount changes to allow the running side to have more of an advantage
      The Support God is just delusional, 3.5 years of playtime and watching specific things get nerfed for specific reason, yes some things get changes also as a byproduct of a certain change.

      Hey people fuck up I get it.. Ive lost count how many times this is, and it keeps happening for a reason.. there is a reason it keeps happening we are past the point of oh man i made a mistake.

      459 Posts, A lot have been very helpful and suggesting stuff etc etc etc. All have a common theme, falling on deaf ears, problem is no one is listening.

      This is a Full Loot pvp game, if you don't want non-consensual pvp. there are blue and yellow zones, enjoy the content they provide.

      And you missed quite a few changes over time, but hey at this point who is counting? Devs certainty aren't!
    • Well,

      That will make red and BZ empty cuz a lot of new players must play safe and not leave the game after getting ganked many times by someone who have full specs..

      So they are trying to make PVP safe for the new players that they already encouraging them to keep playing so they can spend gold for a premium.

      This is how i see it from here.
    • There are many players in Asia, and most of them are novices. Due to the high delay, some professions are at a disadvantage. We hope to consider the problem of delay, and do not let some professions' operations be modified too depending on the Internet speed, especially the axe system that novices like most at present
    • Korn wrote:

      Recently, there have been quite a few threads about the non-consensual PvP balance in Albion Online. There are a lot of complaints that due to recent changes, it is too hard to catch and kill potential ganking victims.

      First of all, note that our balance goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game in a sustainable way.

      Non-consensual PvP in full loot games is extremely hard to do properly. The underlying issue is that it needs to be set up in such a way that it works in the long term, for both parties involved, the gankers, and the potential victims. Without potential victims, there is no non-consensual PvP.

      What's not immediately obvious is that maximizing PvP is not achieved by making the game more and more deadly.

      The amount of non-consensual PvP depends on the number N of possible targets in the zone, the chance E that you can engage them in a fight, and the chance K that you can score a kill in a fight, with the amount of non-consensual PvP kills = N*E*K.

      Here is the thing: If E and K were, for example, 100%, N would drop to close to 0. No potential target will enter these zones if it means certain death (high K) without them being able try and avoid combat (high E).

      There have been tons of different games that try this approach, and what usually happens is that their PvP levels go down drastically once the potential victims stop going to the PvP zones, are stop playing the game. The next stage is then that the players looking for non-consensual PvP only run into each other, which leads to them quitting, too. As far as we are aware, every open world PvP game taking this approach has suffered this fate.

      Now let's look at Eve. Eve makes it very easy for people to avoid combat. You have local chat as a perfect intelligence tool, DSCAN with a huge range, the warp system that allows you to pretty much teleport away and is instant if you are aligned to your safespot, stations/bases that you can dock at, cloaking, gate guns, safe spots in the middle of nowhere. However, if you are caught (scrammed), you are pretty much done for.

      All in all, Eve's non-consensual PvP balance is much much softer than what you have in Albion right now. The chance of dying if you play properly is very very low. While people used to the old ganking system will say that it's now "impossible to catch somebody", our killboards and the countless videos available on YouTube show that his is not the case.

      We can still understand that gankers are upset. If you get used to a system that lets you easily gank players without them being able to do much about it, and this leads to you getting 5+ kills per hour, that of course is an insane amount of fun! However, it is also not sustainable.

      Here is why: due to the game being full loot, each kill you score essentially destroys X hours of game time worth of gear/loot. Let's say the gatherer set takes the victim 2 hours to replace. If you score 5 solo kills per hour, 1 hour of your gameplay destroys 10 hours of gameplay of your victims. Said differently: it takes 10 players getting killed by you over and over again to sustain that. Unless we set up a gameplay center in a low wage country where we pay people to get killed over and over again, this won't work.

      So what's the solution? Again, our goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens, including non-consensual PvP
      1. We need to make sure that the full, no rules PvP zones (Outlands) are worth it for potential PvP targets to play in. This is achieved by making sure that rewards in these zones are much higher than in safer zones.
      2. We need to make sure that the average number of deaths that non-gankers will suffer is such that the zones are still worth it, despite them having to replace their gear now and then.
      3. The average number of deaths suffered per hour is a function of the chance E that an encounter leads to a fight, and the chance K that a fight leads to a kill. Eve has a very very low E, and a very high K. We are aiming for a medium E (our mounts are easier to catch than trying to get somebody in Eve who is constantly warping) and a medium K (escaping from combat in Albion is easier then getting away in Eve when you are already scrammed). We prefer this approach, as it leads to more action.
      4. The sweet spot to be reached is that the no rules PvP zones are worth it for both sides, the potential targets (as on average, their rewards for player there outweigh the risks compared to safe zones) and the gankers (even if they don't score 5+ kills per hour, they'll still get enough non-consensual PvP kills for this to be worth it, and then of course, encounter all sorts of consensual or semi-consensual open world PvP in between)
      I hope that the above could shed some light on the matter.
      @Korn Hey wondering if we are able to get another post like this, based off of your numbers and what you are seeing data wise. Especially curious as to how HOs are playing in the BZ, I know many players complain that the BZ is too safe. Do you guys have sufficient data showing that the number of kills has gone up equally to the player activity? Do the HOs create too large of a safety net so that not enough players are being killed, causing inflation in materials?
    • New

      Drewski17 wrote:

      Korn wrote:

      Recently, there have been quite a few threads about the non-consensual PvP balance in Albion Online. There are a lot of complaints that due to recent changes, it is too hard to catch and kill potential ganking victims.

      First of all, note that our balance goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game in a sustainable way.

      Non-consensual PvP in full loot games is extremely hard to do properly. The underlying issue is that it needs to be set up in such a way that it works in the long term, for both parties involved, the gankers, and the potential victims. Without potential victims, there is no non-consensual PvP.

      What's not immediately obvious is that maximizing PvP is not achieved by making the game more and more deadly.

      The amount of non-consensual PvP depends on the number N of possible targets in the zone, the chance E that you can engage them in a fight, and the chance K that you can score a kill in a fight, with the amount of non-consensual PvP kills = N*E*K.

      Here is the thing: If E and K were, for example, 100%, N would drop to close to 0. No potential target will enter these zones if it means certain death (high K) without them being able try and avoid combat (high E).

      There have been tons of different games that try this approach, and what usually happens is that their PvP levels go down drastically once the potential victims stop going to the PvP zones, are stop playing the game. The next stage is then that the players looking for non-consensual PvP only run into each other, which leads to them quitting, too. As far as we are aware, every open world PvP game taking this approach has suffered this fate.

      Now let's look at Eve. Eve makes it very easy for people to avoid combat. You have local chat as a perfect intelligence tool, DSCAN with a huge range, the warp system that allows you to pretty much teleport away and is instant if you are aligned to your safespot, stations/bases that you can dock at, cloaking, gate guns, safe spots in the middle of nowhere. However, if you are caught (scrammed), you are pretty much done for.

      All in all, Eve's non-consensual PvP balance is much much softer than what you have in Albion right now. The chance of dying if you play properly is very very low. While people used to the old ganking system will say that it's now "impossible to catch somebody", our killboards and the countless videos available on YouTube show that his is not the case.

      We can still understand that gankers are upset. If you get used to a system that lets you easily gank players without them being able to do much about it, and this leads to you getting 5+ kills per hour, that of course is an insane amount of fun! However, it is also not sustainable.

      Here is why: due to the game being full loot, each kill you score essentially destroys X hours of game time worth of gear/loot. Let's say the gatherer set takes the victim 2 hours to replace. If you score 5 solo kills per hour, 1 hour of your gameplay destroys 10 hours of gameplay of your victims. Said differently: it takes 10 players getting killed by you over and over again to sustain that. Unless we set up a gameplay center in a low wage country where we pay people to get killed over and over again, this won't work.

      So what's the solution? Again, our goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens, including non-consensual PvP
      1. We need to make sure that the full, no rules PvP zones (Outlands) are worth it for potential PvP targets to play in. This is achieved by making sure that rewards in these zones are much higher than in safer zones.
      2. We need to make sure that the average number of deaths that non-gankers will suffer is such that the zones are still worth it, despite them having to replace their gear now and then.
      3. The average number of deaths suffered per hour is a function of the chance E that an encounter leads to a fight, and the chance K that a fight leads to a kill. Eve has a very very low E, and a very high K. We are aiming for a medium E (our mounts are easier to catch than trying to get somebody in Eve who is constantly warping) and a medium K (escaping from combat in Albion is easier then getting away in Eve when you are already scrammed). We prefer this approach, as it leads to more action.
      4. The sweet spot to be reached is that the no rules PvP zones are worth it for both sides, the potential targets (as on average, their rewards for player there outweigh the risks compared to safe zones) and the gankers (even if they don't score 5+ kills per hour, they'll still get enough non-consensual PvP kills for this to be worth it, and then of course, encounter all sorts of consensual or semi-consensual open world PvP in between)
      I hope that the above could shed some light on the matter.
      @Korn Hey wondering if we are able to get another post like this, based off of your numbers and what you are seeing data wise. Especially curious as to how HOs are playing in the BZ, I know many players complain that the BZ is too safe. Do you guys have sufficient data showing that the number of kills has gone up equally to the player activity? Do the HOs create too large of a safety net so that not enough players are being killed, causing inflation in materials?
      They have absolute complete ignorance of their own game and how its played. 1 Player is not scoring 5 kills unless they are solo so Yes 1 player is 1 hour destroying 10 hours of gameplay. It is more like 20 people camping a zone for 3 hours = 60 hours of gameplay which are netting around 20-200 Kills in that area potentially destroying between 40-400 hours of gameplay and sometimes even more because of transports etc being 1 zone away from portal zone and locking that zone completely down. The fact that SBI fails to realize how people are playing the game is hilarious.

      How are you balancing 400v100 ZvZ content? How are you balancing the players being chicken shit? How are you balancing people's skill? You can't, You need to put in place things that benefit the majority of the player base and hide it behind formulas. And the majority of players are BAD at PVP, don't want to PVP and would rather this be a full PVE crafting Silver accumulating experience.