Dueling should not kill

STEVIL · September 2016

Recremen wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

@STEVIL I'm not sure you fully understand what the OP wants (or, at least what I interpret as what he wants). He's not asking for a different ruleset or rule change. He's asking for a cosmetic difference in how reaching 0 health is handled, to satisfy RP consistency. No combat changes. No changes in how the winner is determined. Just changes to the fluff and dressing. It's a modest molehill of a request that doesn't warrant being turned into Everest.

He is asking for one of two things.

FORCE EVERYONE ELSE to give up duels that kill.

Or

ADD A CUSTOM DUELING OPTION that allows players to set their dueling requirements.

My last post discussed the issues that can arise if they change their mind and start setting up customizing changes.

If you want to discuss it from the perspective of forcing it on everyone we can.

As for how unimportant his suggestion is, the OP seems quite dogged in his attacks on those opposing it. So it seems some think its more important than you do.

Nah honey you came in here acting like the sky was falling, then accused me of lying about wanting it for immersive purposes. My "attacks" have consisted of the thinly-veiled suggestion that you might not be that into PvP, given how completely unfeasible your suggested solutions were.

Recremen wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

@STEVIL I'm not sure you fully understand what the OP wants (or, at least what I interpret as what he wants). He's not asking for a different ruleset or rule change. He's asking for a cosmetic difference in how reaching 0 health is handled, to satisfy RP consistency. No combat changes. No changes in how the winner is determined. Just changes to the fluff and dressing. It's a modest molehill of a request that doesn't warrant being turned into Everest.

He is asking for one of two things.

FORCE EVERYONE ELSE to give up duels that kill.

Or

ADD A CUSTOM DUELING OPTION that allows players to set their dueling requirements.

My last post discussed the issues that can arise if they change their mind and start setting up customizing changes.

If you want to discuss it from the perspective of forcing it on everyone we can.

As for how unimportant his suggestion is, the OP seems quite dogged in his attacks on those opposing it. So it seems some think its more important than you do.

Nah honey you came in here acting like the sky was falling, then accused me of lying about wanting it for immersive purposes. My "attacks" have consisted of the thinly-veiled suggestion that you might not be that into PvP, given how completely unfeasible your suggested solutions were.

First, i am not, have never been nor ever will be your "honey" so while you obviously want to keep dialing up the condescenion and dismissiveness to those who oppose your idea, its just not helping your case.

Second, never said sky was falling, certainly not at first. At first i came in here pointing out the error in your explantion post about every friendly duel ending in bloody murder - pointing out the immersive rp options for ending a duel without death that exist but that you pretended did not exist when you talked about every duel ending in bloody murder.

Most of my posts have been about that aspect, the disconnect between the rhetoric you use to hang your proposal on - the immersive breaking friendly duel etc.

i did absolutely say it was starting to sound like you did not mean the immersive stuff, because every time the option of actually in character working out the "guidelines" so that the fight IN CHARACTER didn't result in death (as opposed to doing in the friendly duel what you do in the war zone of cyrodil) you dismissed that out of hand and went back to how things work in the war zone of cyrodil. You go from "not possible" and "every fight" to "not fun" and "cyrodil" at the drop of a convenient hat which really does start to look like the immersive isn't that important.

We do not need ZOS to go down the road of enabling all the various "options i want for dueling" as settings or toggles for the reasons i pointed out above. It would be bad for the dueling game, IMO, as it divides the dueling up. Like i said, everyone with their own better idea for what dueling could be "and it can just be an optional setting so..." thinks theirs is the way to go so... ZOS made the right call IMO as far as whether they would go down that long road or just leave it to the players.

As I and others have said, you CAN choose to fight your duel with rules designed to minimize the chance of killing your dueling partner. If you dont actually find those kinds of "friendly fights" fun, then one has to wonder why your wrap so much of your proposal up in the "friendly fights" wrapping paper with a side of condescension for those who point out the disconnect.

Sweety you came in this thread typing in all caps about the HAND OF ZOS over a minor request that the devs already said they wanted at PAX. Then you called me a liar. You aren't here to contribute, you're here to cause a scene.

I am not and never shall be your sweety. It xeems like attemps to focus on most everything except the issues and trying to deflect.

Such usually cover weakness in position.

If ZOS reverses its position and goes down the road of giving every pet dueling option a setting it will be bad imo for tge dueling system, dividing its users, avoiding a consistent playstyle.

If people want an immerdive friendly duel they can do it now just not by doing the full bore kill as quick as possible slaughter tactics from cyrodil.

If people want the full bore cyrodil slaughter battle but without killing, that seems as far from immersive or even having a tie between action and consequence as anything i have heard of.

None of that changes if you call someone sweety, honey, ot type in whatever cap you want to focus on.

andreasranasen · September 2016

This thread sounds extremely PC. Like those Facebook pages named "Sensitive Moms".

anitajoneb17_ESO · September 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

There is NOTHING preventing two dueling character from having a "surrender" sign which if given means "stop hitting me and i will forfeit by walking out".

NOTHING.

NOTHING AT ALL.

PERIOD.
.../...

If the players themselves dont want to hold back a bit to avoid killing their dueling relative/friend, why should they get divine intervention to keep it from happening in the name of immersion?

I'm sorry @STEVIL , but you sound pretty clueless.
If two players agree to not duel to death, they will both end up not making any move, all busy calculating in their head what risk they have to one shoot the other given their stats, their crit chance and whatever else. Also the DOTs have different powers and timers. Of course if the opponent is not at full health the risks of killing him instead of simply hitting him are even greater.
Simply put : in this game, you CANNOT guarantee that you will NOT kill someone or hit too hard. The only option would be to not fight at all.

Ever played vCOH in gold key mode ? Originally the hard part was for the tank to sustain 4 adds while the team DPS'ed the boss down. Now the hard part is to NOT kill the boss before he spawns the 4 adds, and then not to kill the adds before the boss phases. Most tank sets induce damage even when simply passively blocking or roll dodging.

I think the "stop at 1HP" option is an *excellent* idea.

STEVIL · September 2016

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

There is NOTHING preventing two dueling character from having a "surrender" sign which if given means "stop hitting me and i will forfeit by walking out".

NOTHING.

NOTHING AT ALL.

PERIOD.
.../...

If the players themselves dont want to hold back a bit to avoid killing their dueling relative/friend, why should they get divine intervention to keep it from happening in the name of immersion?

I'm sorry @STEVIL , but you sound pretty clueless.
If two players agree to not duel to death, they will both end up not making any move, all busy calculating in their head what risk they have to one shoot the other given their stats, their crit chance and whatever else. Also the DOTs have different powers and timers. Of course if the opponent is not at full health the risks of killing him instead of simply hitting him are even greater.
Simply put : in this game, you CANNOT guarantee that you will NOT kill someone or hit too hard. The only option would be to not fight at all.

Ever played vCOH in gold key mode ? Originally the hard part was for the tank to sustain 4 adds while the team DPS'ed the boss down. Now the hard part is to NOT kill the boss before he spawns the 4 adds, and then not to kill the adds before the boss phases. Most tank sets induce damage even when simply passively blocking or roll dodging.

I think the "stop at 1HP" option is an *excellent* idea.

If you look later, i suggested a sort of sample set of "donts" two charactrrs wanting a "safe duel" might agree to in order to reduce chance of killing. Even mention a chance of still killing "lucky shot, sir" ST3TSFS. Just like people can get hurt from playing flag football or even killed, bad things can always happen when you start doing dangerous things.

So, if someone values immersive gameplay and not killing dueling partners, then handling the attacks differently in that case makes sense when opposed to how one would conduct a full on cyrodil style attack where the goal is killing.

Let me be clear.

"I want to do full on kill style pvp attack burst routine AND have the opposition not die no matter how much i do" is a perfectly valid game-ism gimmick style mechanic that can play good roles for many functions in a game - but in the context of a dueling mechanic it cannpt be supported reasonably by aguments of immersion or how unreal it is to have people die in duels.

And btw there are quite a few quests where you have to do someghing special to enemies after reducing sn enemy but not kill them, like the delves in nw wrothgar with spirits, and like the one you mention, if you use DOT or high burst you can overkill and miss your objective and have to find another.

So it does not seem unreasonable at all if ones goal is both immersion and not killing for you to have to alter your attack routine to try and mitigate chance of killing.

If you throw out the immersion argument, which is fine imo, then you have a different discussion about the merits of this dueling option vs that dueling option, the benefit/detriment etc and then (as this thread shows and as other threads and discussion show there are lotsa different preferences for nuts and bolts of what the "right" duel mechanic would be - draws, time limits, ult zeroing, safe mode, surrender key, etc, etc, etc ) whether that is good or bad.

ZOS went with very simple dueling and imonthey made good choices.
First they said keep the cyrodil combat mechanic so the duel can be used for ssme style combat.
Second they said limit the area.
Third restrict external effects.
Fourth five second clock.
Fifth auto-reject.

Whether its goid or bad to add lotsa different toggled setting for all these other options is a definite discussion to be had, not only case-by-case but overall.

But popping an execute once the enemy hits 10% health and then complaing that having them die breaks immersion is silly.

anitajoneb17_ESO · September 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

If you look later, i suggested a sort of sample set of "donts" two charactrrs wanting a "safe duel" might agree to in order to reduce chance of killing. Even mention a chance of still killing "lucky shot, sir" ST3TSFS. Just like people can get hurt from playing flag football or even killed, bad things can always happen when you start doing dangerous things.

I read your suggestions and I don't consider them as practicable. Even if they were, I still think a "system stop" at 1HP would be a much better option.

STEVIL · September 2016

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

If you look later, i suggested a sort of sample set of "donts" two charactrrs wanting a "safe duel" might agree to in order to reduce chance of killing. Even mention a chance of still killing "lucky shot, sir" ST3TSFS. Just like people can get hurt from playing flag football or even killed, bad things can always happen when you start doing dangerous things.

I read your suggestions and I don't consider them as practicable. Even if they were, I still think a "system stop" at 1HP would be a much better option.

From a non-immersive perspective and in an isolated vacuum i can understand that.

As i stated above, the only problem i have with this approach is that it either forces it on everyone or starts setting up a series of toggle for customizing duels.

i dont like the former because its just trading one "lack of choice" for another.
i dont like the second because as soon as dueling specifics were shown a hoard of "make it work like this, maybe as a setting" started pouring in and IMO ZOS made the right call to not go down that road. The more divided the dueling becomes the less useful it becomes - IMO.

But definitely if immersion is a factor, throwing your KILL CYCLE at someone only to have them live every time is just missing that definition entirely, which is why i would have promoted the idea by gameplay rationale, not immersion.

But then, my experience says most "fights" aren't against friends and relatives (in character friends and relatives.) maybe for others, the idea is that there are more friends and relatives (in character) that they plan to duel with than everyone else so thats what they think should be best for everyone?

Dont know.

But no way "i drop meteor on him at 5hp and he lives" is immersive inclined except for maybe very specific builds and circumstances

anitajoneb17_ESO · September 2016

Frankly I don't think players who duel for the pure competitive aspect of it care whether the opponent actually "dies" or not. They want a winner and a loser, that's all.

I understand your concern about having a whole "board of options" to check/uncheck or even agree upon before any duel. But I think that not dying is a very good idea and should be implemented for everyone (thus not as a toggle).

Apart from that : immersion =/= realism. Those are two totally different concepts.

STEVIL · September 2016

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Frankly I don't think players who duel for the pure competitive aspect of it care whether the opponent actually "dies" or not. They want a winner and a loser, that's all.

I understand your concern about having a whole "board of options" to check/uncheck or even agree upon before any duel. But I think that not dying is a very good idea and should be implemented for everyone (thus not as a toggle).

Apart from that : immersion =/= realism. Those are two totally different concepts.

i have no desire to get into a jargon fest over immersion and realism and context of realism etc.

However, for myself, and bssed on somevresponses on this thread, the idea of totally removing desth from duels for everyone no option is not one that would see universal sport. Not that universal support is required but its not a change i personally like.
I think it also would lead to problems or complications in the future if/when they enable 2v2 or 4v4 dueling. The more they divorce dueling from cyrodil mechanics the harder it is to sustain both, imx.

Mettaricana · September 2016

Seriously why is this even a topic do we really not have something more constructive to complain about? Your complaint that duels should not kill yet soul gems revive and that same soldier you killed 1500times in cyrodiil is not an issue with why he's back alive to kill u again?

Recremen · September 2016

Mettaricana wrote: »

Seriously why is this even a topic do we really not have something more constructive to complain about? Your complaint that duels should not kill yet soul gems revive and that same soldier you killed 1500times in cyrodiil is not an issue with why he's back alive to kill u again?

In Cyro that's part of the experience, in dueling it's neither expected nor constructive, you just spend more time than necessary ghosting around waiting for the next one.

Ivan04 · September 2016

https://youtube.com/watch?v=YZMhlEYjpM4
In this video devs cover why it can't be implemented. I think they talk about it in the first 10 minutes of dueling.

anitajoneb17_ESO · September 2016

I watched that video again and can't find anything related to dying vs/ losing without dying ???

Recremen · September 2016

Ivan04 wrote: »

https://youtube.com/watch?v=YZMhlEYjpM4
In this video devs cover why it can't be implemented. I think they talk about it in the first 10 minutes of dueling.

They said it was harder to code and didn't feel it would be worth spending the time to implement, not that it's impossible. I'm just saying that I think it would be worth implementing.