I did a search and found some threads talking about whether there would be differerent server rulesets...but they mostly degraded into conversations about multi-boxing.
After the discussion about different rulesets on the latest stream, maybe we can list possible server rulleset variation and talk about our preferences?
Server Rulesets:
PVP
Role play
Race/faction based: good vs evil
1 character max per account
Hardcore
What else? What would you all like to see?
Some thoughts on the above...
I was never a fan of the "role-playing" tag on servers. From my limited experience there wasn't ever enough of a community that was committed to, and mature enough to, role play.
I really like the theory of 1 character per account servers but again, from my limited experience, it seems like there are always more subsets of rules on those types of servers that I'm not fond of...like having more items be tradeable than on a standard server. That type of thing really opens it up for the multi boxers to take advantage, and just changes the game in general. I'd be interested in a simple 1 character per server ruleset with no other additions.
^ This might work well with the progeny system because people could still play multiple classes over the lifetime of their one character. For narrative purposes: only allow people to create "another" character through the progeny system...which would mean they would have to retire the original character. (Same difference)
Hardcore has been handled different ways and can mean different things. Maybe it means your corpse is lootable to some extent. Maybe it means there is a death limit before your character dies "permanently". There are lots of possibilities there.
What's your preference/ideas?
Possible Rulesets :
1. PvE
(a) Standard ("enuf said")
(b) Re: 'RP' servers :
I am not sold on the idea of a dedicated 'RP only' server, since I am not convinced that there is enough population to make this viable.
Better, in my opinion, would be 'RP preferred' servers flagged for you during character creation. That way, the RP'ers will likely be spread more thickly amongst a few servers, rather than spread thinly over a large number of servers. Why not a dedicated RP server? ... Sinple really .... while there are many players who like to do 'some' RP-ing, the number of 'hardcore RP'ers' is much smaller. Thus people with a slight inclination to RP would be unlikely to choose a dedicated RP server over a language, or better populated, server.
2. PvP
(a) Standard PvP : this is regular PvP.
(b) 'Faction' PvP : this is close to 'Realm vs Realm' or 'Goods vs Evils' etc
(c) 'Battle Royale' PvP server :
A server that is run for only a fixed period of time - e.g. 3 months. It has specific rulesets:
1. Perma-death
2. FFA loot or some variation
3. Can join at any point, but if you die, re-rolling a new character is the only way to continue.
At the end, last 'X standing' get prizes. Anyone still alive gets prize in proportion to both how long they have been alive and what level/XP achieved. Winners (aka Survivors) can opt to either move this character to any other server (PvP or PvE) or can 'roll forwards' into the next 'Battle Royale' where they get to join as a 'progeny' (thus giving a slight advantage).
Evoras, is not a fan of PvP but might be inclined to try a 'Battle Royale' Server!
I think Role-playing "preferred" is a given. You can't force people to role play even if they choose that server.
That Battle Royale sounds interesting. That is a very specific form of hardcore server. The time limit adds a nice layer to what can sometimes turn into a server where players become somewhat risk adverse (like permadeath in a challenging game on a permanent server). Rewards for the survivors sounds good but how are those rewards used? Are they available to your character in the next round of battle royale?
There are so many forms of of hardcore servers that could be implemented. That is different than most I have seen.
On that note though, I do like the idea of there being some type of added reward for those players who are willing to play on a hardcore server. Offering additional rewards might help the population of those servers over the long run. Any thoughts on rewarding those players?
philo said:I really like the theory of 1 character per account servers but again, from my limited experience, it seems like there are always more subsets of rules on those types of servers that I'm not fond of...like having more items be tradeable than on a standard server. That type of thing really opens it up for the multi boxers to take advantage, and just changes the game in general. I'd be interested in a simple 1 character per server ruleset with no other additions.
What's your preference/ideas?
A server with this should be very interesting i would like to see how it will populate for me as an altoholic i will not be on it stick it with permadeath so the "hardcore" have a server for me its about comunity so ill stick to pve with no side's then my guild can play any race/class and we can still play togehter in an hars pve enviroment wich we have to handle as a team but that's just my prefered game.
As few as possible to avoid splitting the community and having the disaster PR after server merges. So a PvE and a PvP server.
Up to the devs to decide if they want special ruleset servers, but I hope they dont. Instead I hope they have active GMs to avoid bullying of RPers and a ruleset they actually reinforce. I am not a RP my self, but I accept that some people are into that.
Its also already kinda decided.
Honestly, the two do not mix very well unless the game is specifically designed with them both in mind. Pantheon is a PvE game first and foremost and the majority of our community are PvE focused, they have made it very clear that they do not want PvP on the PvE servers, we listened to that and still want to create a place for the PvP crowd, so we are basically just creating PvE servers and turning PvP on for those who like PvP (plus different rulesets depending on the majority vote), there will not be any shared servers though, if you want to PvE you can do everything on a PvP server that you can on a PvE server just with the continually added risk of other players attacking you.
Grizzly said:
A server with this should be very interesting i would like to see how it will populate for me as an altoholic i will not be on it stick it with permadeath so the "hardcore" have a server for me its about comunity so ill stick to pve with no side's then my guild can play any race/class and we can still play togehter in an hars pve enviroment wich we have to handle as a team but that's just my prefered game.
I hope I deciphered your 1 sentence paragraph correctly hehe...unsure
I find 1 character servers promote an added sense of community. Everyone knows everyone even more so than on a normal server because there are no alts diluting the pool. Also, reputation matters even more when you only have one character and can't go hide on an alt.
Just curious what all would be on an HC server. Like:
Then: Death
Rares:
I really like the ideas of risk vs reward so it might be crazy difficult on this server but your drops are better and less rare or your exp for completing a difficult task is increased, etc. Make it harder but more rewarding. Anyway just my 2 cents but I can't wait for alpha, maybe it is that hard and we will be asking for a softcore server. Just Kidding, but maybe.
Keeping in mind that some of the things mentioned in the starting post can be done on a "standard" ruleset server my thoughts are:
1. May not need a roleplaying server but maybe a poll seeing how many people want it would help. I usually play on RP servers so it feels odd to say I'm not sure we should have one but people can roleplay on a standard server just as well - a lot of roleplaying is in guilds, and I often see people in crafthalls or inns roleplaying on standard servers. Historically more than a few of us liked RP servers because of name restrictions so two key points are whether VR would actually enforce name restrictions (most companies do not bother any more) and whether there will be name restrictions other than very basic ones (no "bad" words for example) on the standard servers. Given the spreading of the community I am simply not sure that avoiding annoying names is a good enough reason for a different server that VR would have to spend extra time enforcing special rules on.
2. PvP would probably be a plus. Another rather odd comment from me - a lifelong carebear that doesn't play PvP. History says there is a clamor for pvp servers mostly from a few vocal people but they don't stay popular very long - pvp players get bored faster than average and move on especially in a game whose heart is pve. But - and a big but - it will help attract people that may like the game enough to have characters on the pve servers as well. It will make a real percentage of hardcore forum members happy (well under half but not trivial). It probably can be done without major investment of extra time based on what VR has said about the cost of adding and removing cloud-based servers. It will give some people that love the game and also like pvp something to do with "alts" even if they mostly play on other servers. It may attract some of the more loudmouthed and aggressive free trial players (and keep them off of standard servers). No that isn't an implication that anyone here that likes pvp is loud or aggressive we are a very different group than the people that float around looking for free games to play for a few weeks and then leave.
3. What type of pvp ruleset is important. Not being a pvp player (other than a misspent year on DAOC after three years on the cooperative server) I have limited knowledge, but from reading forums I would guess that pure free-for-all would be the least likely to succeed and some means of factoring in faction or alignment would be a plus to many forum members. Another issue where a poll would seem a good idea.
4. Having mentioned two very obvious potential rulesets without giving - or having - a firm opinion, now let me mention one more that the debates on these forums make me think might be good. I would like to say solo-friendly versus less solo-friendly but that is a non-starter since the whole focus of the game is grouping. So I won't even go there.
How about stupidly easy and trivial versus insanely and ridiculously difficult (to use terms the proponants of each style will apply to the other). We have seen debates about whether there should be rapid travel between places you have aready been to or whether that would make the world seem too small and trivial. We have seen debates about whether even a map with no points of interest showing only places you have been would remove too much of the difficulty and fun of exploration. We have seen debates over whether the economy should be based on a bazaar model or an auction house. We have seen debates on whether even a limited group finder would oversimplify too much. Looking through the forums will show many other issues debated over the years amoung hardcore supporters with divergent views.
Maybe one ruleset should take the harder core stance on many of these issues and one should take the more moderate stance. But even the "moderate" one should reflect the heart and vision of the game. Maybe mounts would be a bit easier to get. Maybe travel would be a little easier. Maybe there would be a minimalist maplet. But it would still be Pantheon - group oriented, very slow leveling and quite difficult.
Permadeath is probably a bad idea. I often play permadeath for the challenge but I rely on my own commitment to delete a character that dies. A permadeath ruleset (tried in Wizardry 8 by the way) would be a nightmare as crashes and lag-caused death eliminates beloved characters. No insult intended to the developers but even the best game will have *some* crashes and lag.
Abacda said:Just curious what all would be on an HC server. Like:
- Double exp required for levels 1-20
- Triple exp required for levels 21-30
- Quadruple required for levels 31 - 45
- and finally, Quintuple exp required for 46-50
Then: Death
- Same thing for levels 1-20 you have an initial death penalty and it then doubles, triples, etc. for each death in concurrence. Die 5 times in a row trying to do something you take 5 times the death penalty
- Or some other form penalty such as an increasing the chance for damaged gear or lost gear.
- Or a combination of factors.
Rares:
- maybe a 1 in 20 PH kills pops a rare in regular servers but on an HC server its 1 in 50
- or said rare has a 24 hour respawn now on HC it's 48 etc.
I really like the ideas of risk vs reward so it might be crazy difficult on this server but your drops are better and less rare or your exp for completing a difficult task is increased, etc. Make it harder but more rewarding. Anyway just my 2 cents but I can't wait for alpha, maybe it is that hard and we will be asking for a softcore server. Just Kidding, but maybe.
I like this idea, a server that's extra time consuming, I just don't agree with the multiplicative death penalty, to me that's too much, all else I'm game.
Im curious why should there be a special server for "certain" rules that is for sp games with 4player options and let you set difficulty, if you feel like you need a certain rule cant you stick to that and let everyone else play by there liking mostley its pve/pvp that need diffrent servers, most other rule you can imply on yourself without forcing others ,so cant that be a solution.
@Grizzly
Nah, that doesn't work on MMO's, what you're sugesting takes away the shared world experience. If you're the only one on a server doing first person, Roleplay, hardcore or Good vs Evil races, you'll end-up being left out or felling like a dickhead XD
I worry about community splitting with too many different server types. This is supposed to be a predominantly PvE game - so at most, I think what I would like to see is:
- Bulk of servers be pure PvE (no idea how many servers there will be)
- An RP server with the potential to grow (allowing people to move to new RP server if one is added and they want to)
- A PvP server with the potential to grow (allowing people to move to new PvP server if one is added and they want to)
I would not want to see special ruleset servers beyond that... i.e. nothing that impacts gameplay in any way. Just a division so that folks who want to RP or PvP can feel at home.
EDIT: One thing I NEVER want to see - a single, solitary anything EVER changed in the game because of a PvP concern that will in ANY way impact the PvE game.
So its to gather everyone with diffrent preferences that cant be easy would meen a very large sum of diffrent servers. And its to "force" everyone to stick to the the rules ,this makes me wonder if ther ever been a "totaly no rules" server in any game , i would like to see some streemin from that, maybe VR can make some polls in the forums to figure out what kind of diffrent servers Pantheon comunity may whant to have...
jpedrote said:A first person only server would be cool, game is so different when you can only see in first person.
that would be awesome. agreeing 100% with you.
also faction based pvp servers darkies vs good vs neutral (shorties??) would be my favourite setting (yes im an old vallon zek player;)
Evoras said:I am not sold on the idea of a dedicated 'RP only' server, since I am not convinced that there is enough population to make this viable.
Better, in my opinion, would be 'RP preferred' servers flagged for you during character creation. That way, the RP'ers will likely be spread more thickly amongst a few servers, rather than spread thinly over a large number of servers. Why not a dedicated RP server? ... Sinple really .... while there are many players who like to do 'some' RP-ing, the number of 'hardcore RP'ers' is much smaller. Thus people with a slight inclination to RP would be unlikely to choose a dedicated RP server over a language, or better populated, server.
There's really no way to enforce RP so isn't saying "only" vs "preferred" an artificial distinction? Maybe I'm missing a concept here. Do I get booted from the server for not saying "Arrrr" on Talk Like A Pirate Day? So long as RP shows up somewhere in the identification of the servers, people who are bent towards RP to any degree are going to gravitate there naturally. Some people choose RP servers, not because they necessarily want to RP themselves, but because of the type of players that tend to be on those servers versus the general population elsewhere. I don't think I've met anyone who does RP who wasn't quite friendly and a lot of fun to play with.
So big vote YES on having marked RP servers.
I'd also like to see a single PVE server where the CS team is essentially hands off and rule of the jungle applies. This is targeted towards large alpha personality guilds and players who want to compete hard, play hard, camp steal, train and generally live by the power of the sword and every dirty trick in the book. If you want to dominate Pantheon and have real bragging rights, test your metal against like-minded players and live by your wiles. Toss the play nice policy out the window for these guys and let them go at each other - minus the PVP. Not being able to directly engage in combat with your antagonist puts a whole different dynamic on disputes and competition. At the same time, enforce PnP strictly on other servers and go so far as to banish repeat offenders (individual players or entire guilds) to the jungle.
Instead of a Hardcore server where if you die, you lose your character. Why not make one where if you die, you forfeit everything on your corpse. Keep your levels, your bank etc. But all your worn gear, backpacks, carried money is gone. I think that would attract much more players than 1 and done.
>There's really no way to enforce RP so isn't saying "only" vs "preferred" an artificial distinction?<
Looking at other games over the years the distinction has been that RP preferred is meaningless in terms of ruleset or developer action. It is a way to let roleplayers know where they are most likely to find other roleplayers. A RP server at a minimum has a different naming policy that in theory is actually enforced. It also may have different zone/world channels e.g. a distinction between RP channels and OOC channels. As far as I know no one has ever been booted from a RP server for refusing to roleplay.
The idea of a server for first-person view. Am I missing something? Normally anyone can go to first person view if they want - why would you want a server that forces everyone else to do it?
The idea of a permadeath (hardcore) ruleset that doesn't wipe the character but takes his or her gear. Same problem mentioned above - crashes and lag spikes. Better to do it voluntarily and if you die destroy all of your gear. Also bugs, of course and I do not mean insects. Suppose a boss one-shots you because of a programming error - it wasn't supposed to be an impossible fight. Gods know I've seen things like that often enough. Lose all your gear?
As few servers as possible!, I loved the way SWG did it pvp/pve enabled by using the TEF flag. And how RPG/PVE/PVP all exisited on the same servers, thats what made the community for me, players had to police things themselves, it was not perfect but it brought folks togther. And was most fun i ever had in an MMO.