Zero Motivation

[DeletedUser]

This is the first time I've considered actually posting one of my ideas... so please forgive me if I foul up the template somehow. I'm fully aware that there will likely be blowback from this... but it simply makes logical sense.

Proposal
Very simply, I am proposing a "fail" message whenever a task is attempted at zero motivation.

Current Workaround
To my knowledge, there isn't one. There are no serious negative consequences to doing tasks of any sort at zero motivation other than the loss of experience points, which is of negligible consequence to a great many of those who do such.

Details
I feel that tasks should produce a "fail" message at zero motivation. This reflects the fact that the character is completely burned out on a given task and simply cannot muster the strength or the intestinal fortitude to continue on with a fruitless and draining job, no matter what it might be.

"Fail" messages can be as simple as "You lack the motivation to attempt this task. A change of pace would do you good." or as detailed as "The thought of one more duel is enough to make you sick at your stomach. You lose your lunch in the street as you reach for your weapon. You take 6 points of damage and stumble back to your room in the hotel. Maybe you should try another line of work for a while."

I feel that this would bring an aspect of realism to the game in that burnout is a serious situation. Anyone who has dealt with it can readily admit that having no motivation for something means that it just isn't getting done.

Contrariwise, if a "fail" message is considered to be too limiting, perhaps imposing a severe "debuff" to the stats of the character while they continue on with a task that is at zero motivation. If dueling, then the chances of losing go up dramatically. If working at a job, the chances of finding items goes down dramatically. However, I feel that a straight "fail" message would be the easiest path to take in terms of coding and making it work in the game as it stands.

I am aware that this would make going for the one golden weapon a bit twitchy, but since the quest calls for a motivation of less than 30%, it would still be able to be accomplished so long as motivation stayed between 1% and 29%.

Abuse Prevention
I'm not entirely certain what sort of "abuse" would be a consequence from this as this is intended to close what many feel is an existing "abuse" of the system. Zero motivation is something that does bother many players. And it's not like motivation isn't easy enough to regain with a little variety in work.

Visual Aids
None that I can think of, other than the two sample messages listed above.

"You lack the motivation to attempt this task. A change of pace would do you good."

"The thought of one more duel is enough to make you sick at your stomach. You lose your lunch in the street as you reach for your weapon. You take 6 points of damage and stumble back to your room in the hotel. Maybe you should try another line of work for a while."

Summary
A significant portion of the player base finds the idea of continuing on with a task at zero motivation to be fruitless and a possible abuse of the system. Burnout is a serious issue for a great many people in real life and this would add an aspect of realism to the game that could be a benefit for those who play here.

The implementation of a "fail" message would be a relatively simple matter, so far as I am aware as it doesn't involve a lot of complicated coding or balancing and making the restriction apply to all tasks is the absolute epitome of fairness in play.

I think that this would improve the game overall by encouraging players to work at more than just one thing and thus experiencing more of the game itself.

Administration
Does this idea meet the Ideas Guidelines & Criteria? Yes
Does this idea appear on any of the Previously Suggested Ideas List? No

 

[DeletedUser]

Seems to me from what I've read that the zero mot has much to do with dueling. I don't profess to understand it because I do quests, not duels.

But I have to admit some admiration for someone who will use the word "contrariwise."

I gotta ask: do players actually get to zero that easily? I find energy the biggest problem. Do three jobs, come back and do another, and then hotel overnight. Motivation is never a consideration.

 

[DeletedUser]

It's mostly crafting products, products for certain quests like Charlie, and the occasional quest drop. Do one job all the time and you can get to 0% even without premium. Anyway, that's the problem. If you're grinding your motivation down to 0%, you aren't having fun as it is, but doing what you have to do to reach your goal. I think 0 XP, 0 cash, and 0 luck drops is enough punishment and see no reason to add insult to injury.

 

[DeletedUser34315]

As a dueler, 0 mot is still a very, very viable strategy, and it's good that way. If a 0 mot. dueler can't duel at 0 % motivation, then one of the last dueling tactics will be gone.

 

[DeletedUser]

Agreed Gandalf, duelings dead in the water as it is, don't empty another barrel of lead into it.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm afraid that I'm one of those who doesn't understand the need to continue doing something at 0 motivation either. I don't understand what the "strategy" is in regards to dueling; I simply do not understand the purpose behind dueling anyone who isn't an enemy of your town or your alliance and also a dueling player as well; I, quite frankly, don't understand dueling in general.

In order to complete the related daily tasks a player only needs 3 NPC duels, which are simple enough, and/or two player duels. Five duels a day will not bring a person anywhere near the 0 motivation barrier, so I don't see the purpose.

I do, though, understand the need to grind for items for Crafting, as that is my specialty and the fact that I have to grind on these jobs is frustrating to no end because it limits my ability to simply have fun. Part of the reason I am stuck in the 300 to 350 bottleneck in Field Cook on Arizona, and have been stuck there for the better part of... maybe six months?... is the need for massive amounts of low-drop items.

So yes, this would also put a damper on one of my favorite activities, but I don't see how it would be this horrible "final nail in the coffin" of dueling. I don't see how dueling is so close to being dead anyway, with the regularity of finding duel reports in my inbox from where I have been targeted while minding my own business and, predictably enough, lost because someone shot from behind me, metaphorically speaking.

 

[DeletedUser]

There's a massive difference between running around the map and dueling anyone, whatever build just because you can and dueling other real duel builds. Tigermite is talking about duel build vs duel build.

If you don't understand dueling then you have nothing to say on the subject.

 

[DeletedUser]

You say you don't understand dueling, then say that you don't understand how it doesn't work anymore, or how 0 Mot works.

Hmm, see a connection here?

0 Mot is an strategy used by duellers, you use NPCs repeatedly to degrade your duel mot to 0, then when you duel players, you gain the minimum amount of exp, and as such you dueling level stays low, so that you can keep on dueling the njubs.

As for you not understanding why anyone would duel a person if that person is not an enemy of town or alliance, the answer is A: Cash, B: Fun!

And finally, as to you not understanding why dueling doesn't work anymore, look throughout the forums at the numerous threads and posts on the subject.
Dueling now is merely a matter of luck, and 0 Mot is the only stratagem left open, do you really want a game where you don't get dueled? After all, success is sweeter if there is the possibility of failure.

 

[DeletedUser]

To be quite honest, sir, my opinion matters just as much as anyone else's. Just because I have not acquired an encyclopaedic knowledge of the subject from the day the game was first brought online through the changes made in the last update, does not mean that my opinion on the matter is fundamentally invalid.

People have opinions all the time without exhaustive knowledge of one subject or another. People are entitled to any opinions they wish to hold, whether they have knowledge or experience on the matter or not.

And, for the record so that there is no confusion on the matter, the statement was not made flippantly. The statement of my lack of personal knowledge was made as an invitation for someone more knowledgeable than myself to explain why it is necessary for a dueler to continue on a fruitless task when it gains them neither money, nor experience, nor goods. Particularly when such individuals seem to seek out those who are incapable of giving them either a challenging fight or any other reward.

If this were a role-playing game, I would understand, somewhat, the concept of fighting the same creatures again, and again, and again. It is called grinding and the goal is to gain experience and treasure, though the matter of treasure is somewhat dependent on which game is being referenced. I am highly skilled at grinding, with a patience for that which astounds even me. But since the matter of dueling in this game is more a "wait for the reports to come in" matter, I don't see how it can be nearly as fun as, say, watching your Emboar gain a Supereffective strike on a Pawniard that has the health bar slide down to nothing faster than you can see it go. *shrug* But that's just me.

So please, enlighten me, if you would.

 

[DeletedUser]

Thanks for doing the work for me, why do you play the game? because you (or at least you used to) find it fun, why do duelers play? Because we (or at least we used to) find it fun!
And you made my point for me, over the years, dueling has been degraded to a useless and impractical device. are you saying you would like The West without dueling at all?
It appears you do.

 

[DeletedUser34315]

In theory, i like your idea, because it is realistic, and logical.
However, making every dueler have no choice but to be an exp. dueler or a sort of half-baked low motivation-but-not-0 motivation dueler truly would remove one pure dueling tactic. There's really only 2 left as it is.

 

[DeletedUser]

To be completely honest, I have philosophical concerns about any game mechanic which sets players against each other. It creates in me this discomfort that stems from the question of "if the players fight each other... who is it that they are not able to unite against?" But that is mostly my personal issue and one I do my best to set aside whenever I look at matters like this because I do understand the drive to compete and I would like to see a system of combat that allows for such individuals to compete against each other as they wish.

You say that dueling is broken, how is it broken? You say that it is useless, how has it been made useless? And most of all, why has this been done? What inequities in the system were the developers attempting to redress in this system that seems to raise shadows of how, back when I was playing early EverQuest, the various Mages were overpowered and when the Developers attempted to institute some balance in the system cries of "NERF!!!" resounded across Norrath.

I remember when the changes to the system were being discussed. I remember quite clearly being told that there was a single Developer who was overseeing the whole matter and was exhaustively testing the various builds to be certain that the new system worked.

I still do not understand how matters went so wrong.

However, given the current expectations concerning the upcoming version change... I have severe reservations regarding the attitude of the Developers towards the player base in general. It smacks of the attitude of TSR during the late 80's, when the CEO was a woman who quite openly said spiteful things about those who chose to buy the product she was responsible for selling.

Yes, I've been involved in role playing games and numerical combat systems for longer than some of my friends have been alive. I began with Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, 1st Edition, and progressed through to Dungeons and Dragons 3.5, at which point I stopped because 4th Edition seemed geared more towards a graphical game environment then one played with pen and paper at the kitchen table.

I have played EverQuest, and many Final Fantasy games, several Pokemon games of the 4th and 5th generations, and assorted others along the way. I have helped in the creation and development of several game systems for tabletop play and I have worked with a team of people to attempt to correct a fundamentally flawed and inequitable role playing system with very limited success. I learned a lot from that experience, most of all that if the ones attempting to enforce a system do not understand it, then it will fail, no matter how balanced it is made.

The overriding principle, the Prime Directive if you will, for all Developers should be "First, Do No Harm" followed closely by "Balance in all things". I do not know why this is not so, but I dearly hope that such an Ideal is at least in the back of their minds and it is simply a matter of confusion about how to achieve both goals. Most of all, I hope that I am wrong in seeing these shadows of things which have been. I hope that the Developers are not so arrogant as I fear or blind and deaf to what is going on around them.

But I do not know them, or how decisions are reached by them, so I cannot say for certain.

I would very much like to see a whole and complete Dueling system that allows those who enjoy such matters to do so while leaving those who do NOT enjoy such things the freedom to be left alone and enjoy the aspects of the game which they enjoy.

In an ideal game, I would like to see a much more interactive combat system, one that allows for the stance changes to be taken in real time, even if the numerical comparisons take place "offscreen" so to speak. But that is an ideal and likely MUCH too complicated for implementation, however much it would enhance the experience, because it would require both combatants to be online, and consenting to the duel.

It isn't that I wish for Dueling to disappear. It is very much an aspect of the setting. But I wish for a system of Dueling that does not smack of schoolyard bullying with dueling focused characters seeking out and repeatedly attacking those unable to defend themselves simply because they know that they can win.

I want for each and every player to have the freedom and the ability to do what allows them to have fun with a minimum of difficulty. I want this game to be the best game in existence, for the widest variety of players.

Help me understand, so that maybe we can help the Developers understand and make the game as a whole better along the way.

 

[DeletedUser34315]

It is not useless.
It has simply been modified too much.
The old dueling system, of walking to a town's saloon to duel, had advantages and disadvantages.
IMO, walking to the player is far more realistic.
There used to be a lot wider range of builds, before 1.3.6, and even earlier updates.
Brief over view- charisma, strength, dexterity, mobility, mob/dex, char/strength, and dozens of custom builds that were a mix of various ones.
Now, dexterity-aim/dodge build is essentially the last effective build. All others have had their various skills reduced too much. Also, luck (pure random number generation) plays a much larger part in the dueling formula.
Ideally, two online players competing with their actual RL skill in a dueling game, would be great. However, this is not WoW, or some such game. Its beauty, (at least till 2.0 comes out) is that it allows you to be a casual, but successful player.
Some have proposed that duels be challenged based, with both players having to accept the challenge.
There's very few players who are online often enough to do that.
There's not enough duelers for those who are not duelers to be safe from dueling.
Those who were duelers would have to walk for multiple hours just to find a single target.
Yes, the dueling often does resemble schoolyard fights, but short of redesigning the entire game, to be an active, must-be-online game, there's really no way to fix that.

As to duelers attacking those who aren't duelers, thereby being more likely to win, you have to consider:
We can barely do any jobs.
We have little health in fort battles
We are essentially inept at everything except dueling.

That's the sacrifice a dueler makes to be good. A fort fighters sacrifices jobs, and dueling. A working/questing character sacrifices dueling, and fort fighting. Everyone picks their role. Yes, you can be a jack of all trades-but you won't be great at any of them, and therefore, logically, someone who's pure at fort fighting, should beat you in a battle, or a worker find better items/more money, or a pure dueler beat you in a duel.

If a way for duelers to duel, but not those who do not want to be dueled, was seriously sought, NPC's could be improved.
Having NPC's that weren't garbage would go a long way towards giving duelers something to test their skill on, other than players. Also, increasing the rewards from NPC duels to actually be meaningful, would make that a viable alternative.

Having scoundrel-type NPC's would also be extremely interesting.
Say, 500, 1000, however many, computer-controlled characters that walk around the map, in full dueling gear, with levels from 0-120. Have them walk to a new town once a day. Have them have varying levels of skill, from not a dueler, to pure dueler. Have their dueling levels be from 0-whatever the highest-leveled player is.
Have them give cash, and wins, and KO's, but make the 48 hour mode not apply to them.
Perhaps, give, say, 10-350 exp. a win, depending on how tough the NPC was.

That is one way duelers can have something to do, and give them something to do apart from duel players.

Getting back to my original point, there's really 2 types of pure dueler:
0 motivation,
and exp. dueler.
Your idea would limit that to 1 type of dueler, although, from a realism perspective, i like the idea a lot.

 

[DeletedUser]

My very rough concept of how dueling was supposed to work, in terms of the pure numbers involves a number of different factors, none of which seems to be involved anymore it seems... Forgive me if I have to use rough terminology, my memory for actual skill names is extremely limited.

You have the two weapon types, Melee and Ranged. Melee uses "Attack", or whatever the Physical skill is, to determine damage, Ranged uses "Shooting".

But in order to hit the target, then "Accuracy" comes into play, which is contrasted by your opponents "Reflex" or "Dodging" or whatever the Skill is. Accuracy works like DnD's "To Hit" and the other works about like "Armor Class with Dex Bonus".

Once the strike hits, or doesn't as the case may be, then "Soak" comes into play on the defensive side, an amount of damage that is simply shrugged off. This would be... "Resistance"? I'm not sure.

The inclusion of "Luck" is actually supposed to be a reflection of the die roll that is cast when playing on a tabletop. A 20, for instance, always hits and a 1 always misses.

The stances seem to be a matter of where attacks hit and how much of a damage bonus they get... but then they also affect accuracy... and I really am not very familiar with all the factors involved.

What I do not understand is *why* any of these is "weighted" against the others when they are all supposed to be equal, allowing for different focuses. There are the Speedsters, who focus on being fast and accurate, but might not be hitting the hardest with their strikes. There are the Meat Walls, who can take hit after hit after hit, but are going to be slow as heck and going to be *taking* those hits because they can't dodge them. There's the Glass Cannon, MASSIVE damage capability but if you get a hit on them then they're gonna feel it hard.

I see your point about the limitations. To be honest, as much as I dislike always losing whenever I'm targeted, I just can't bear to give up the variety of jobs that I can do to try to reskill to something more combat-oriented. And yes, that sort of give-and-take is what I mean when I talk about "balance in all things". Every aspect should have its benefits and its disadvantages and the benefits should be *worth* the cost at every turn.

To make my idea playable, then there would *have* to be other options for Duelers including stronger, more rewarding NPCs as a viable contrary option against continually targeting players. In all honesty, I prefer the idea of hunting NPCs for wealth and experience as opposed to seeking out players who aren't looking for fights. There's no risk in hunting NPCs of accidentally triggering a feeling of being bullied in someone who might have had a particularly traumatic childhood.

After all, people are known to take things personally that were never intended as such and we all know how emotionally invested we can become in these worlds where we play.

Maybe I'd consider trying something more combat-oriented if NPCs were more viable as legitimately rewarding targets. From a purely conceptual standpoint, I have as much fun as the next person completely monkey-stomping an NPC in a way that I simply cannot accept when facing another player, someone who is a real person sitting at another computer screen. As it is, though, NPCs give less exp and money than even the lowest level jobs and there are no goods gained that might be used for other purposes.

So without massive development in that sector then there's no way to make this a viable option without further damaging the game as a whole. Which saddens me greatly.

 

[DeletedUser34315]

My(also incomplete) take on the dueling formula:
Aim- helps you hit. Countered by dodge, also, if you are the attacking player, countered by tactics, if you are the defender, countered by appearance.
Dodge-helps dodge
Toughness-resistance to melee damage(vigor counters this)
Reflex-resistance to range damage(shooting counters this)
Tactics-makes you less likely to get hit as a defender(appearance counters this)
Appearance- makes you less likely to get hit as an attacker(tactics counters this)
Shooting-increases damage done with firearms(reflex counters this)
Vigor-increases damage done with melee(toughness counters this)
Say, for example, a player with 100 dodge and aim attacks a player with 50 dodge and aim.
Not including stances,: player 1 "rolls the dice" (the RNG fires up) and rolls a number between 0 and 100.
Player 2 rolls a number between 0 and 50.

For further example, let us say that aiming your stance so that it hits where they are not dodging gives, say, *2 bonus to aim.
Aiming where they are dodging gives, say, a 1/2 bonus to aim.


Your point of the glass cannon, tank, etc, is very true- in an ideal game environment.
The sad fact is: Melee is weaker than range, and a lot of builds have been changed since the start of the-west, that they are no longer feasible, or never were.
There is no tank build, due to the fact that duels don't last enough rounds for HP to come into any long term effect.
A pure aim, pure shooting "glass cannon", is not possible within the constraints of the game.
"Speedster", as you put it, is essentially the only build.
Arguably, the most powerful build(and there most certainly is one that is better than the rest) is all AP dexterity, SP split between 1/2 aim and dodge, or variations of that. (More aim, more dodge, etc).
Without knowing exactly how duels are calculated, i cannot be more precise.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think, then, the primary issue that exists with the dueling process is the lack of transparency regarding the formulae and how the various skills interact. When the changes were made, all I remember hearing is that this went up, this went down, but nothing solid in terms of how much of a change took place or what the resulting skill relationships were.

And since I didn't know the formulae to begin with, that information was, quite simply, worse than useless for me.

To be honest, I would very much like to understand the skill relationships better because I cannot seem to be able to even complete *quests* involving duels because I quite simply cannot win duels, and if "luck" were as strong a factor as it seems to be thought to be, then you would think that I would win one every now and again.

As far as I know, though, winning a duel is determined by the amount of damage dealt relative to each other, so the "Meat Wall" build *could* work if it were "soaking" a good portion of the damage. Still, this is me trying to be somewhat idealistic.

 

[DeletedUser34315]

If you want, you can message me, for tips on how to beat the quest NPC's. I've had some experience with them.
Resistance, the "meat wall" build, was "nerfed", as it was deemed too powerful.
Now it's not really effective.
Also, whatever effect tactics and appearance had, it was changed from being a multiplier, to being addition.
(if attacker had, say, 50 appearance and defender had 100 tactics, defender got his dodge*1.5, for example. Again, i do not know the exact number.)
That was changed so that defender got, for example, +50 bonus to dodge.

Yes, without knowing the formula, telling us that things are changed but now how much is a little frustrating.