Rend’s reputation system is your shield against same-side griefers

    
5
Ink?

As a faction PvP sandbox, Rend is going to attract certain types of players… and one of those types is certain to be the dreaded griefer. It’s bad enough when someone in another faction is a jerk to you and camps your corpse, but what about that jerk who derives pleasure from creating headaches for his own side?

The dev team is trying to prevent as much same-faction griefing as possible with the use of its reputation system. “It’s our job to come up with a system to protect the faction from the single person hellbent on destroying it,” the devs said. “Obviously this system will require an amount of iteration, which our current pre-alpha testers are helping us out tremendously.”

The core idea here is that players will need to contribute heavily to their faction through resource donation or tech research in order to gain permissions to build the base, access bank space, and craft certain types of gear. Reputation permissions can be set by the faction to activate at certain thresholds, giving each server its own chance at getting the balance just right.

Source: Rend
Advertisement

No posts to display

newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
GiantsBane

After having played pvp games for a long time since the “golden” UO era I’ve noticed something that a lot of these games get wrong trying to copy over the much lauded reputation system from UO into their own worlds.

In UO life as a red was difficult if you didn’t have an established base of operations, but dying was no more or less painful than it would be for anybody else. Everyone dropped all their gear on death, along with inventories. Being red just meant you killed indiscriminately in your hunt for player gear, and that most major cities were out of bounds (a pretty big downside).

What i’ve seen come up in quite a few other games (the first being the popular lineage / lineage 2 series ) trying to emulate this system is a shift to even more heavily punishing players opting into the outlaw lifestyle. In most of these games gear dropping wasn’t a guarantee, only a chance, but going red would raise that chance exponentially depending on “how bad” you decided to be. Basically it was all stick and no carrot style of gameplay, meanwhile non red characters could kill those naughty boys for a much greater chance at expensive loots.

Of course the irony with these systems was that while meant to prevent griefers, they opened up a whole new opportunity to grief players behind a system designed to protect them in many cases.

At the end of the day I have to ask a question, what’s the point of reputation systems when they’re so miserably flawed and terrible in more cases than not? Why even allow inter faction pvp outside of duels if you view players of the same faction killing one another as griefers?

Let the players police themselves, and stop trying to implement artificial soft restraints on them that do more harm than good (not to mention make more work for you as devs).

Reader
silverlock

I don’t need a system to stop everyone just one to stop most. I like the sound of this one.

Reader
Paul

Only way to prevent that kind of gameplay is to have the game mechanics not allow it – anything else people will find a way round…

Reader
silverlock

Simply not true. You have gank boxes like say Face of Mankind where six players would jump you while still doing the tutorial just for the lulz then you have games like BDO where in all the months I played was never ganked even once.

Reader
Melissa McDonald

I am extremely skeptical about “reputation”, “flagging” and other weak-sauce measures designed to turn PvP players in to Sir Lancelot, who honorably fights with fair play and good morals.
What we’re going to get instead is a bunch of Joan Jetts, who “don’t give a damn about my bad reputation, no no no no no no”

It’s as though these game designers have never been on the intarwebz before, and have absolutely no clue about human nature.