Suggestion What's "Really" in need of fixing.

So, I think, from a 30,000ft perspective, the real issue (other than ESP of course) is that there's ingame support for violent inter-player interaction (le doi), but there's no corresponding ingame support for peaceful inter-player interaction.

The markets blow, and there's no ingame support for inter-player markets.
There's no alliance system ingame, however well discord has been serving us.
There's limited space for peaceful inter-player interactions/projects.

This means that
A. With no ingame interplayer market, or ingame support for intermarket trades, the devs cannot change much about how we trade.
B. With no alliance system ingame, the devs have a very limited ability to have an effect on how clans and alliances are interacted with by players.
C. With limited options ingame for players to interact with eachother without consequence, there will always be limitations on multiplayer content. (No place for randos to bump into eachother and start building some big dicks or something (or interclan diplomacy building) without fear of ganking eachother, or being ganked by 30 chinese ESPers)

Tl:dr - With more ingame support for the ways in which we already interact with eachother ingame/indiscord, the developers will have greater control over how we do it, and how it effects the world.


Suggestion to fix it all!

Add an alliance system!
-If someone is not in your clan, or is in a clan but not registered as an ally, you cannot see their clan name.
-Use the alliance system to control how many alliance members are allowed to spawn on a friendly tile (to limit multi-alliance zerging trying to scooch around clan limits)

This requires folks to use the ingame alliance system to effectively fight together, while also providing the devs the tools they need to manage over-clan-limit zerg strats.

Change how tiles spawn.
-They spawn in 1 or more clusters now, centered around 1 (Depending on region pop) "Flotilla" tile.
-These Flotilla clusters spawn once a week, and there are tight passages between limited tiles "squeezing" the regional pop as they travel from "flotilla" to "flotilla" as the world burns. (a pseduo wipe/pirate season).
-The number of tiles that spawn (in the "flotilla" clusters, or the passages) is defined by region pop (as is), however the cap size for tiles in these "flotilla" clusters is highest closest to the flotilla tile, and lowest out on the rim of the cluster. (Allows for a greater volume of space dedicated to smaller groups to hide and farm in, creates competition for large clans for the limited high cap tiles, while still providing buffer space in the form of the mid-size cap tiles in-between for smedium clans). Large clans will want to move as quickly as possible through the passages between the old clusters and the new ones.

The Flotilla Tile
- A Giant Walker in the center of a relatively barren desert with rocky outcrops sporadically around the rim, which functions as an inter-player centralized marketplace, has a no-pvp AOE with no timer that has a radius of 1/4 of the map width (center half of map protected, outer rim a pirate zone). Can rent "vault"s for storage space on the market walker with flots, re-occuring costs of course, inventory burns with the flot tile.
-"Gladiator Arena" spawns instead of the usual trade station, allows pvp inside, allows flot or item gambling? Public scoreboards or something?
- No fancy or dense resources spawn on the tile
-Depending on pop size and usage, there could be minor market tile spawns to assuage pop concerns?

This provides a safe space, while still requiring risk, without affecting the full-loot pvp aspect of the game. People could come there and build grand halls for inter-clan diplomacy (or penises), trade in relative safety, without requiring an actual inperson trade, chill together on a randomly roaming gigantic walker with the rest of region there and watch the pirates try to catch the merchants on their way to the wall?
 
Last edited:

VWithnail

Active member
I can't remember which other thread had it in - but someone mentioned removing the names from above anyones head but your clan/allies. The nagging feeling I get about that part of the idea is that without being able to tell who you're interacting with definitively : everyone becomes KOS, because why would you risk letting one of your local rats/their friends get past you? Currently my clan have had neutral relations with more farmers/clans than I can remember because it's good to have someone filling your proxy. If we couldn't tell who anyone was unless they were allied with us - it makes everything black and white, with no shades of grey. Most clans aren't going to want to ally everyone on their tile in any kind of official capacity, because you don't want to be responsible for the behavior of people you don't know, and they might have moved on in 3 days anyway because they can't take the heat of whatever warfare you're embroiled in.

I personally feel that the lack of an alliance UI component is an anti-zerg mechanic for melee fighting. If you wanted to create a huge alliance of people who barely knew each other currently, every fight would be a clusterfuck unless you were extremely organised. In order to overcome the lack of unified colours/names in the UI, communication has to be good. Everyone out there in an alliance has been the victim of friendly fire - the better allies will do it less and the worse allies will do it more. Smaller groups can create chaos among larger groups of enemies if the enemies are allies, rather than in the same clan at the minute. I like that part of it.

The flotilla tile idea is interesting - but atm it feels like the population gets squeezed enough. I'd go the opposite way and create way more space, with degrading quality of life the further out to the edges you get. When they get the ESP in hand that would at least give more places for people to go and lick their wounds. The game has a real problem with spawn mechanics whilst transitioning between tiles. Bubbles being ineffective/buggy, people camping spawns and building traps around them etc - those issues would become of paramount importance to deal with before implementing tile centralisation or a flotilla. The flotilla being a safe area : I honestly think that with the ups would come the downs. The tears would flow about people being attacked on the edge, people dipping in and out of the protection and trolling etc. It's inevitable - so to invite more concentrated trolling, the upsides to the mechanic would have to be significant or it's not worth it. I don't think those upsides should extend to being able to farm/craft/process anything within a safezone.
 

Jeon

Active member
It does though affect the full loot though, if a zone has non PvP it should also have zero kind of resources.
 
@VWithnail -Fine-tune the clan name - Make it such that a range finder still shows the clan names. Solved the problem?

How is not having a system in place at all to exert any amount of pressure on the community whatsoever an anti-zerg mechanic? Seriously, like, you just opened your mouth and poop dribbled out. I'm talking about installing at least a system by which the devs can change the rules to and thereby define and effect how large clans and alliances fight. I'm not sure if I can put it any more succinctly than that. Without an Alliance system, the developers are very limited in their options (again, repeating what I said in the OP)

We're obviously not talking about "in the moment" we're talking about gameplay and mechanic concepts. Please refrain from referencing any claim that "It wont work with such a low pop" or any other sort of flavor like that. Not interested in discussing where we want to be in juxtaposition with where we are at now, it is by definition unproductive. How does my suggestion effect the total available space per region during flotilla clusters? The squeeze is during burn-transitions from the old flotilla cluster, to the new regional one that spawns to the right, just to ensure that no matter your playstyle, we all gotta get squeezed at some point (it IS a FULL-LOOT PVP game).

Spawn mechanics is a completely different discussion. Put the pipe down. We're talking about game direction and design, I repeat, not bugs and glitches.



@Jeon - Read the post dingleberry. Its not full safety, and there will barely be any resources, none that are tile specific at least, and no significant density of anything, as I mentioned, in the OP.
 
Last edited:

Jeon

Active member
@Jeon - Read the post dingleberry. Its not full safety, and there will barely be any resources, none that are tile specific at least, and no significant density of anything, as I mentioned, in the OP.
it is full safety within the borders you described, you get attacked outside? rush inside, ez. While this kind of safe tiles would help those whiny players who pest survival games, it would add nothing to the game by itself; so at least for what my opinion is worth, your suggestion is useless. If players want no-pvp, they simply have to quit last oasis and open another game, or leave official servers and enter PvE private servers. Please frogs, stop pesting these forums with silly non-survival game requests, thanks.
Not all dingleberries attached to your anus can read, but this one can.
 
I mean, so first, let me apologize for posting grumpily without my morning coffee.
Second, I guess what I mean is that I definitely intend for there to pirating on the tile, but there would also need to be some safety to support the commerce in some fashion
 

VWithnail

Active member
How is not having a system in place at all to exert any amount of pressure on the community whatsoever an anti-zerg mechanic?
I'll flesh out what I thought was an obvious statement.

If people want to ally a clan : and don't have any UI advantage from working together (I.E how it works now) - they have to co-ordinate well in order to do it. They have to be able to organise well enough to know who their enemies are and who their allies are by being deliberate with their positioning.

If you create an alliance UI system where people see green player names for clan, for instance, and blue player names for allies - suddenly they don't need to coordinate as much against enemies. The enemy = the guys without names. Currently, my allies don't have names either : so in order to work together we have to be smarter than "EVERYONE JUMP THE GUYS WITH NO NAME". When fighting outnumbered vs multiple clans, your goal is to either isolate the weaker clan and do away with them before help arrives, or mix your enemies among each other so that you know "no name = enemy" and they don't.

Alliance UI systems support zerging and blobbing enemies more than the absence of the mechanic : the absence of the UI mechanic FORCES people to be better organisers/pvpers to make use of allies, because the UI doesn't do their thinking for them.

That's how not having a system advantages organising as well as numbers, instead of only numbers. If you create a system that readily identifies players from other clans in the same way as clanmates are currently (seeing names above heads from further away/on map) - players in alliances of many clans don't have to use their brains to identify enemies anymore.

Without an Alliance system, the developers are very limited in their options
How so?

Incidentally - in-game systems of allying clans etc are fine. A menu showing who your allies are and whether you want them to have access to proxies/containers/doors, be able to take tax from trade, in-game messageboards or other things are also good possibilties etc : my issue is when a UI component that aids in zerg fighting is included. There's no good reason to make it any easier for multiple clans to steamroll other clans than it is now. Numbers confer enough advantage - they should come with SOME disadvantage in terms of combat and thankfully because the game is mostly melee combat : the disadvantage doesn't have to be complicated. Not being able to super-clearly and quickly identify allies in a melee brings at least the requirement that you're not TOTALLY shit, otherwise you kill more of your allies than your enemies.
 

Jeon

Active member
Why safety through godly rules though? With an alliance system in place, even disorganized small clans would start feeling safer, alliances would just group up on a tile making it impossible for other parties to attack, while trading and PvE would prosper.
 
Y'all aren't understanding my point, you're just coming up with what ifs, that the solutions to, still inevitably involve some system ingame that the devs play around with till things are chugging smoothly.

But I'll engage?

@VW -

You realize, that everyone would be able to use this alliance system, right? Its not an advantage only large zerg clans will use.
By installing, ingame, the discord system (in effect/in part) that the community is already using, we are providing ourselves with the infrastructure we will ultimately need to solve these problems, is that clear enough?

@Jeon -

Who said safety through god rules? I'm just talking about a mechanic that is already in game, just blowing it up to a whole tile pretty much with a bit of extra fluff on the side, while still ensuring that pirating can happen. I'm relatively certain I'm repeating myself again.
Alliances are already doing that, its their point, by definition. But without an ingame support for alliances with a corresponding incentive to require utilization of system, the devs can't thereby limit and modulate how many alliance members may be on any given clans tile, or whatever the solution ultimately becomes, but the bottom line, and what I start the OP off with, is that without these systems in place, there's not much the devs can do or try.
And none of this effects the tiles we've already got ingame, so I'm not going to respond to your grand statement about "trading and pve would prosper" like its a bad thing or something..
 
Last edited:

VWithnail

Active member
@VW -

You realize, that everyone would be able to use this alliance system, right? Its not an advantage only large zerg clans will use.
By installing, ingame, the discord system (in effect/in part) that the community is already using, we are providing ourselves with the infrastructure we will ultimately need to solve these problems, is that clear enough?
I do realise. Infact, the part of it that shouldn't ever happen wouldn't affect a large, singular clan anyway. Do you understand what I'm saying? Do you see any problem with creating a system that makes it not only possible but probable that you would run into alliances of dozens of clans specifically built to cap tiles and zerg people? This is an issue with select clans at the minute, because not everyone wants to be in a big clan and very few people can run a big clan successfully for long without it imploding. If your suggestion results in people seeing allies names above their heads like we can with clanmates currently : it would result in actual zergs - where the component members don't even need to speak to each other once allied. The only understanding required is "If it has a name above its head = safe. If it has no name = dead".

^ do you see the flaw that I'm highlighting ? Do you agree that this outcome isn't ideal? Do you have a workaround if so?

I wish you would actually engage :p It feels like I'm trying to row you through this discussion.

I think I understand your point. Implementing an alliance system will allow devs to set the parameters for what an alliance can be with pros and cons. If I'm right and that's your point - it doesn't change what I've said :S The guys who are allied currently and winning fights can just keep doing what they're doing and ignore the new system anyway, so in terms of it acting as a limiting factor : you've yet to explain how devs would use mechanics that enhance zerg gameplay more than large clan gameplay to limit zerging.
 
I am engaging, really I'm trying.

I understand your perspective, and believed that I had fully responded to it by stating that the intention of such a system is to allow the devs the ability to control how many allies are allowed on tile. It can be a sliding bar tied to clan and allied clan populations, or it can be none!
The point here, is that without an ingame system, the developers cannot have any control over that whatsoever.

If you would like to see this issue managed in some fashion, than the existence of alliances needs to be acknowledged via ingame support.

Though you do still seem to be glossing over the fact that utilizing the alliance system makes clan fights much easier. If clans want to work together outside of the alliance system, they are more than free to do so, but at least those actually utilizing the system would have an advantage in this case by clearly being able to identify friend and foe. Add a cooldown timer on leaving alliances, I don't care, I'm not here to debate the finer details, and really we shouldn't invest too much in doing so until there is at least a system ingame.
Or fuck it, add some rule whereby the game considers invading clans to have a water disadvantage, and the only way the game can distinguish an invading clan from an ally clan is its existence in the alliance white-list or something, really, I don't give a shit about the details, but can we all agree that a system for alliance management in-game is needed?

I'm Really not trying to debate about how the alliance system would work ideally, or in practice, I'm just stating its practical necessity.
 

Rain

Active member
interesting conversation. If it's really true that "not seeing allies names" makes allied clans work together better, and if it is also true that seeing ally names would just make it easier to thoughtlessly "pile on the nameless dude" then you might just have found the solution to zergs.... Apply that same logic to clan members. Make it so you can no longer see the names of other clan members, and therefore only organized groups can effectively work together. No more ability for people who barely know each other to work together as a zerg. Also make it so clan members and walkers do not appear on the map, only items placed appear. The larger the clan, the more difficult it would be to work together under this circumstance.
 
I mean that's a bit extreme.

I think that, if an alliance system was properly incentivized, and not utilizing said system came with strong enough disincentives, it would be simultaneously easier to work together as a bunch of small clans ingame, and harder to manage large clan diplo actions outside of the game, while effectively managing "alliance zerg abuse"
 

Jeon

Active member
i'm 100% to remove names on ALL players even when pretty close, you should do something like "hand shake" or "bro fist" to have their name revealed.
Would also be very very nice if the map was an ITEM you must craft, when exploring you update your map like in minecraft, you should be able to make copies, and sell them. The same goes for the world map.
 

Weirdpete

Active member
I am also for complete lack of nameplates, though I think if it were implemented, greater customization of gear and appearance.
Because I still think being able in some ways to define the look of yourself and clan members should be a thing, it shouldn't be magic floating names.
It should be things like carrying a clan banner, or dying gear to clan colors, etc

Also, why not limit clans to a lower number, not to lessen zergs "because it wouldn't make any difference", well if it wouldn't, then why not try it anyways, and push into large alliances of smaller clans? A banner series of 15 different color and emblem variations seems more interesting than a swath of the same color.
 

Jeon

Active member
Because there no reason not to play together, stop fooling yourself, they won't limit clan size. There literally no reason to limit gameplay now, instead of core changes they have just to pour down heavy content, constant shifting meta, making the game fresh each month at least.
 

Weirdpete

Active member
I'm not being foolish, I'm not expecting changes, nor do I see a particular reason that it would HAVE to be done, there's other mitigating things that can be done that lead to a better gradient.
I'm positing a what if, and saying it would be more intereting if large alliances were a thing, and comprised of many smaller clans of bands working together, each with their own colors and banners and smaller territories. Then when a large battle came about they worked together against a similar alliance.
 

VWithnail

Active member
What you're describing is already possible, and doesn't happen - because alliances of many small clans get decimated by organised alliances of a handful of bigger clans. The crying about zerging comes most often from the alliances of small clans because despite the numbers being equal - an alliance of 5+5+5+5+5+5 vs 30 people in the same clan or 15+15 has practically no chance. Bigger teams get better by being more familiar with how their leaders operate and what they expect, knowing who is good at what and where to use them, knowing who is stronger at fighting and who can be relied on to not get tunnel visioned. Small alliances/clans by definition don't WANT to play in a way that would enable that level of familiarity and co-operation with that number of players.
 

VWithnail

Active member
interesting conversation. If it's really true that "not seeing allies names" makes allied clans work together better, and if it is also true that seeing ally names would just make it easier to thoughtlessly "pile on the nameless dude" then you might just have found the solution to zergs.... Apply that same logic to clan members. Make it so you can no longer see the names of other clan members, and therefore only organized groups can effectively work together. No more ability for people who barely know each other to work together as a zerg. Also make it so clan members and walkers do not appear on the map, only items placed appear. The larger the clan, the more difficult it would be to work together under this circumstance.
It is true - but something you have to temper the suggestion of removing all name plates with is : at what point does it create more hassle and work for the players than problems solved?

Say this change comes in tomorrow - no nameplates at all. Do you think most people would prefer the change? Do you think anyone you know who isn't playing the game right now would come back for it? Do you think it would stop large clans working together cohesively to fight each other, and by extension dominating smaller clans?

In those large clan battles : it's true that you would have widened the gap between a zerg and an organised large clan - but you've widened the gap between both of them and EVERYONE else even further. The most hardcore and exceptional players in small clans would do better : but anyone average or less would just have their pvp game made significantly harder, with no upside.

Yes it makes the game more skillbased : but are you aiming for LO to be **THAT** hardcore? The idea to remove nameplates isn't a positive change for anyone except the absolute apex predator PVPers and solo players.
 

Magnus Lefou

New member
It is true - but something you have to temper the suggestion of removing all name plates with is : at what point does it create more hassle and work for the players than problems solved?

Say this change comes in tomorrow - no nameplates at all. Do you think most people would prefer the change? Do you think anyone you know who isn't playing the game right now would come back for it? Do you think it would stop large clans working together cohesively to fight each other, and by extension dominating smaller clans?

In those large clan battles : it's true that you would have widened the gap between a zerg and an organised large clan - but you've widened the gap between both of them and EVERYONE else even further. The most hardcore and exceptional players in small clans would do better : but anyone average or less would just have their pvp game made significantly harder, with no upside.

Yes it makes the game more skillbased : but are you aiming for LO to be **THAT** hardcore? The idea to remove nameplates isn't a positive change for anyone except the absolute apex predator PVPers and solo players.
Agreed and I think it should even be the opposite. You should be able to make an easy difference between your mates and your ennemies. For example the cape you put on the head slot armor could be at the same color as your clan color instead of being only red. In addition, you can also add the clan symbol on the cape and have personalized symbol/banner for clans. Devs can also had a new item like an armband to craft once and don't lose it even if you die (like the grapple) that will automatically match the color of the clan or you can choose the color when you craft it so you can match ennemy colors for strategies.
It would be totally logical and even more, you can find tons of example in real life of people of same group/gang that wear the same clothes and/or colors to differentiate themself from others or wear the same clothes and/or colors as ennemies to fool them.
 
Last edited:
Top