[Mega Thread] - Death Cost

  • 5

    Copy paste from my post in the now closed discussion thread.

    This is a bad idea, plain and simple. It has no benefit to those of us that were on the fence about the PvP in the game to begin with and will potentially drive new players away. I have a long history of playing PvP oriented MMO's and FPS's so I, like many of you, am no stranger to death in my game at the hands of others.

    As I have gravitated away from PvP games due to just not enjoying that aspect anymore, I was convinced by my buddies to give this game a go due to it not penalizing you upon death. With a bit of apprehension I picked the game up and have a couple days under my belt now.

    My enjoyment is substantial, I have been pursued relentlessly in some matches and in others I have been hailed and helped. I have assaulted Galleons trying to make a run to turn in a skeleton forts treasure and taken a chunk of their spoils, and I have lost Voice comms with my crew and showed my displeasure with the Captains decision by grabbing the powder keg placing it on the foredeck and blasting myself to Davy Jones Locker.

    The current design of PvP is fantastic. I can see where they might want to tweak mechanics to slow down the death zerg so that a hard fought battle does not feel cheapened by constant near instantaneous respawns. But a death tax is not the right move.

    Longer respawn times for multiple rapid succession deaths, boat respawns with little or no resources forcing you to restock before heading out for revenge, these are penalties I can get behind. Losing my hard earned gold only limits my ability to Roleplay my silly pirate with my silly pirate crew and will drive folks that share my mindset away from the game.

  • 7

    Adding death cost to a pvp game is rather silly. I cannot understand why this needs to be implemented. Like others have said this will cater towards the trolls and griefers. I thought SoT was supposed to rid Toxicity not add to it! Shame on you Rare.

  • 10

    I'm a pirate. I left civilized society so that I didn't have to pay taxes. What gives?

  • 6

    @khaleesibot I think that adding a gold cost to death would be a very bad idea. Not only would it make the sting of defeat worse it would make it more game-like and less sandbox. Last night my fiance launched me straight as possible into the air from a cannon. If I'd died I would have gotten punished for that, instead of laughing I would have been annoyed.

    Right now when you die you have multiple punishments, first and foremost is time. Time you're not playing, time you can't attack the enemy, time you can't repair, and if you sink you lose whatever time and rewards that were attached to the chests you had.

    I think a better option is escalation of time on the death ship for deaths within a short amount of time of each other. First death, 30 seconds, second is 40, third is 50, fourth is 60 and then cap it at 60 cause that is a long time to sit around like an idiot.

    Then if you feel like you need to add a mechanic that charges you it can allow you to pay to reduce that escalated time cost back to its default value of 30 seconds. That, to me, seems far more reasonable if you insist on some sort of gold sink.

  • 4

    @philatticus said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    I think it's a good idea if and only if respawn mechanics were fixed and there was a clear understanding of what "avoidable" means.

    Fixing the respawn issue would void the ridiculous “need” for a death cost in the first place.

  • 8

    The fact this is even being considered by Rare tells me that the company is in no way in touch with typical players or with the griefing issues that are rampant. No, I will not waste my time explaining something so obvious here.

    The only reason I'm able to play the game and, more or less, look past the current meta issues is because I've figured out how to grief the griefers. I'm a patient person and it took me a while to figure out how to work around Rare's issues. Good luck finding others like me that have that combination of skill and patience. The majority will just leave. (and among others I know personally, they are leaving btw ... this is not a threat... it's happening)

    To be clear, the current meta issues I'm referring to are not related to this Death Cost idea... you already have a set of sizeable problems and now you want to add this idea that seems like it has not been given the proper consideration. This idea ignores so many obvious issues I can't even start. Don't do it. I don't want to see you trash your own hard work.

    I personally have 5 people watching my experience with the question of whether they'll buy the game. As of today I'm telling them to wait until this question has been resolved. If it is implemented, I will soundly advise them to stay away. Now that was a promise.

    Good luck Rare!! I hope you do succeed with this game. It has so much promise.

  • 0

    I like the idea of this.

    Currently if you have nothing on your ship then you really don't have any penalty for getting killed. Because of this you might try and attack a ship or cause havoc right when you spawn. Having to pay a fee would prevent this from happening.

    Where I don't like the idea of this is when people spawn camp on your ship and kill you right away. hopefully respawning from this situation would be free.

  • 1

    I think we need more details on this :
    "Rates are dependant on the cause of death, so the more avoidable the death, the less patience the Captain will have when we enable this feature!"

  • 3

    This idea could MAYBE work if we had some sort of "banking" system. A place we could store gold so it isn't on our character. Then we would be able to limit our losses.

    But, as others have said, this system would incentivize the toxic/ griefing players to keep doing what they have been.

  • 7

    I've already stated my point in a post so ill just show what I wrote here:

    Listen I love what you guys are doing but when I saw those patchnotes I thought you had lost your mind. Adding a Gold Penalty to death makes the game worse overall especially for solo players who are going to have it harder then Galleons most of the time. It also makes death even more penalizing so not only am I losing my loot I'm losing my gold too. This makes people way too reluctant to do anything cool or interesting. It also will create a saltier more toxic community because every kill you get it has such a large negative loss for the enemy this will mean that when people die they'll get more p****d off. And At this point you may aswell ban solo players since clearly there is no regard for them whatsoever in this decision who often are more likely to get bullied by Galleons and what about the Order of Souls missions why would I do them when I have a much higher risk of losing money.

    TL;DR The Gold Penalty on Death is anti-fun, hurts solo players, makes OoS too risky, makes the community more toxic, and generally goes against the fun spirit of this game

    If your trying to encourage more cooperation Rare this isn't the way to do it

  • 5

    Charging people for dying is a really dumb idea. I honestly can't believe his is being considered. All this is gonna do is add an extra level of frustration to the game. Aside from being killed by other players, the game frequently swarms you with groups of skeletons when treasure hunting. I had roughly ten skeletons chasing me around an island last night and died numerous times trying to fight them off as I looked for treasure. If i had been penalised for said deaths....well, I would not have been a very happy pirate.

  • 9

    The “rewards” are cosmetic. The loss of gold for any reason is not in balance with cosmetic rewards. This is the slippery slope that leads to a “game of progression” which this game was not intended to be. The original concept was that “fun” would be the key concept, not a highly competitive game of mine-is-bigger-than-yours.

  • 4

    @khaleesibot after reading many of the posts after my first comment I am convinced that without having resolved the respawn issue that adjusting the respawn timer based off of death would be most appropriate.

    Increasing the timer for careless deaths would detour people from many activities considered to be “toxic” by a small majority of the community.

    It would add cost for the people who think it’s needed and not ruin the game for the vast majority of the player base who think death cost is a bad idea.

  • 9

    I've already stated on a few other forums that this is a bad idea, but I'd like to share an example here: there is another game that had a big PvPvE area that had a death penalty: The Division. For those who don't know, The Division had an area called the Dark Zone where players could find different kinds of loot by fighting enemies, opening chests, etc. And all the while you could run into other teams of players and never know if they'll leave you alone or attack you. But any loot you found wasn't yours until you extracted it (sound familiar?) and other players could kill you and take your stuff at any time. But when you die in the DZ you lose exp and money. And if one group is bent on making your play time miserable? Then kiss your hard earned money goodbye. The Division Devs openly said that the DZ was a failed experiment and since playing the Betas I've feared that this game would become the new DZ, but after playing and grouping up with another crew to take on a Stronghold before splitting the loot, that fear faded. But if a "Death Tax" was introduced? Well, goodbye Stronghold buddies. Hello Sea of Dark Zone!

  • 4

    @tangolit The fact that they are considering this is due to the overwhelming amount of negative feedback from people who don’t know how to play and feel they need to complain.

    How often do people post on a forum to talk about good experiences? Now compare that number to people who post about bad ones.

    Simply put we should focus on educating people about the game and fixing the real issues like respawn distance rather than blaming rare for reading the feedback of ignorant players. I did not however expect them to take this route and am very disappointed this is the topic they wish to look into. SHAME’

  • 5

    Judging from the comments so far in this thread and other threads on the topic I think we can see which way the community is leaning on this already. Implementing a death penalty adds absolutely nothing to the game. The only logical reason to have it is as a gold sink to make up for a lack of things to spend gold on, or to push players towards the future cash shop.

    Now the idea of a penalty for a SHIP sinking, spread out among the crew, isn't a terrible one. It would encourage people to take more care in choosing their battles, and introduce some more critical thinking into the core gameplay loop. That being said I think it's way too early to even consider gold penalties and the like.

    There are plenty of other little bugs and issues to focus on right now, and the first three months here are critical. Without any major content releases until June you're already going to have players getting bored or frustrated enough to jump ship (pi); we gamers are a fickle bunch these days. Adding more frustration to the game at this point would only accelerate that, especially when other quality of life changes (Merchant Alliance voyages need work, being the only ones that aren't chainable. Also, the combat in general could use a couple of passed to increase it's depth: blocking, parrying to stagger, etc.) would benefit the game much more.

    Heck, if your goal here is limiting gold gain to promote the cash shop then there are better ways to do it: reduce rates (dumb), or add more interesting cosmetic customization options (hull/sail shapes, ship adornments, etc. [put your modeling team to work instead of just your texture artists]) (good), etc.

    How about we wait until some of the critical flaws are fixed, some more varied content (even if it's just more skins) is added, and the cash shop has been released for a month or so before adding something this unnecessary?

    A large part of the appeal of this game right now is casual stupid fun: skeleton forts, ship battles, launching ourselves out of cannons, doing dumb things with gunpowder barrels, etc. all come with a high risk of death. In what world does it make sense to discourage players from consuming what little content is available, avoid each other, and get frustrated to boot? It goes completely against the "emergent gameplay" rhetoric you've been pushing since the game was first announced.

    I prefer to give new ideas the benefit of the doubt and don't like making blanket statements. I do adhere to calling a snake a snake (colloquially synonymous as "bull fecal matter"), though. In this case I think I speak for the majority in saying that if this "death cost" is implemented as it's currently defined you have your collective fingers VERY far from the pulse of the community. It serves no productive or positive purpose in the game as it stands now, and any discussion of the topic should be punted at least 6 months down the road.

  • 3

    @derkgoesbezerko

    My concern as well I know to scuttle. But sometimes you still try to get back to your ship for whatever reason before it sinks. But having people spawn camp that white screen while you hear people and the water stinks.

    Then soon as you spawn it blundered or cutlassed no matter how good a player you are spawning back you don't have the time to equip your weapon before your immediately dead

    So scuttling from the ferry is the best option, however a spawn death will cost you.

    Personally a death cost should be no different than the weapon damage same across the board

    Or say a ship sinks you so you come back right before it detects it sunk so you dont spawn on the ship like your supposed to but as your ship is finish sinking (has happened when I scuttled because I went through the ferry door to early) and you die by a shark

    Is the death by a shark gonna cost more than a,pirate death when it was inevitable and not your fault?

    Or at a Skelly for you die by skellies that would be considered avoidable so it also would cost more?

    Boils down to what's avoidable
    *Jumping from a cliff too high
    *Jumping overboard
    *Being teolled and put in a brig then dieng there by drowning or them using a explosive barrel
    *A crew mate killing you with say explosive barrel
    *Dieing at the edge of the red sea
    *Dieing by the kraken
    *Dieing at the Skelly fort (you die a lot there its inevitable)
    *Death by snake hidden in a bush (just saying lol)
    *Struck by lightning
    *Drowning

    But my point is death will happen some can be avoided sure like jumping from high cliffs or diving overboard for fun then get eat by a shark but most can't be avoided

    So how can a death be measured really and detected as avoidable or not?

    Example-
    spawning in at a outpost in a storm and your trying to hurry and set sail to get out and get going, but then your about to take off and lightning. We are supposed to wait it out? But sometimes you can't because you are bailing water from your ship you don't want to catch a mermaid.
    **this could be argued avoidable why not wait it out I'm the tavern well you are saving your ship
    -you get killed and the enemy pirate spawn camps you on your ship, will the second death be considered avoidable?
    **some will argue yes scuttle, but being a pirate im sorry your ship is your Jolly Roger you will always attempt to go back one so times to save it
    -Drowning
    ** Usually avoidable but going into a deep shipwreck I do usually take a banana, but if your gathering supplies you think ill grab one down there you search barrels ...nothing... What happens you hurry back and right at the surfaxe you scream Noooo becauae you either get eat or drown
    ** this can be deemed avoidable just don't search it or you should have taken even 1 naner.

    But you get my points I'm making here
    I just think if this is being implemented be like all weapons same damage all cost the same

    But that's my 2 cents and opinion

  • 4

    @uberkull said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    @azbat360 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    Hey Joe & Mike what happened to your Gold being safe once we turned our spoils into the traders? Don't make me go back find every video & timestamp where you said this.

    Please dig them up ohh Pioneer. I would love to see the videos and the response/reasoning for this knee-jerf addition.

    If this wasnt in your plans at launch, don’t add something that impacts the only reward currency in game.

    On it...

  • 5

    Adding insult to injury.

    I can't even afford a new pair of stinking pirate socks after returning 10 chests. How should I be able to afford my funeral

  • 7

    Quoted from RaKKe83 from another thread which I agree on his suggestion if a death penalty was implemented

    "Our suggestion in terms of the player death cost, would be do double the respawn time, and introduce some kind of bribary of the captain of the ferry to half that back down to what it currently is. (I also saw someone mention above doing tasks onboard the ship, this is also a great idea). This would provide a pretty happy medium, and the cost remains a choice."

    But like I've said in 2 other threads before this mega thread what needs to be addressed is the spawn killing and likely abuse that will come from the death tax. Like I've said two times in two other posts people who like to troll and spawn kill people on there own boat will likely abuse this death tax to further troll other players. I've experienced being spawn killed multiple times already and just knowing I'm gonna lose gold now cause of it makes me p****d off. Address more pressing matters then randomly just proposing a death tax before fixing all the spawn camping abuse and other in game glitches

  • 6

    I think it's a thought in the right direction but it's going to punish PvP victims more than the aggressors. It also encourages spawn camping further...

    What we really need is further default respawn distances - throw people like 5+ squares (in a straight-ish line on the map) away from where they died on the map. That and remove the starting supplies from respawned ships (not freshly spawned ones that just entered the game world though, if possible, as one would assume they have prepared for the voyage ahead of time to some extent). This gives more adequate breathing room for folks who just won a PvP fight as it'll take at least a few minutes to gather up some supplies off of whatever island/outpost the loser(s) respawned at, and the further they are put from where they died = the more time someone has to collect any treasure and move on.

    Right now it's too easy to just go back to where you were sunk, and you're given enough supplies to fight for a little while as long as you are conservative with cannonballs. That really needs to change and it would be better to hit it on both ends rather than just one.

    Also with a gold cost for death - I understand the thought behind it but I don't think this is going to mean anything for PvPers who do not care about cosmetics and the PvE game. So it's ultimately something that will punish PvE players and not the PvPers that are active sources of frustration for people who didn't buy this for the sandbox PvP.

  • 3

    @hobosloth28 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    id prefer a cost to recover your ship over a cost after dying.

    This is a excellent idea. Everyone upvote that post. Ships are the only real way to travel the seas.

  • 5

    @uberkull said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    @hobosloth28 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    id prefer a cost to recover your ship over a cost after dying.

    This is a excellent idea. Everyone upvote that post. Ships are the only real way to travel the seas.

    Absolutely not. I sink an average of 2-3 ships in an hour. If piracy is my primary focus during that hour. Typically due to respawn issues it ends up being the same people.

    Considering the skill range of people adding ANY physical cost to death or loss of ship would ruin the game for new players. I strongly disagree to this.

  • 3

    @khaleesibot

    bad idea, please do not do that.
    P.S. why can not I get gold if I kill sharks or skeletons?

  • 0

    @khaleesibot

    This now means that if I sit on my ship during a raid and let my team do the work I get a bigger cut... SOUNDS GOOD TO ME!

  • 8

    “I’d rather kiss a dead squirrel than see any punitive gold costs incorporated into this game. They do not fit and serve no purpose in a game like this one. Save them for The Division.”

  • 2

    @toastywrath sagte in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    @tangolit The fact that they are considering this is due to the overwhelming amount of negative feedback from people who don’t know how to play and feel they need to complain.

    Sorry, that doesn't make any sense at all. The complaints come from people that are killed by other players. Who would react to that by punishing them even more? I think the death tax has nothing to do with PVP and is instead meant to make forts more challenging because maybe the progression is too fast with how it works now. A death tax could encourage the teamplay that the raids were meant to have. Lose money if you are only four people and die a lot, or get other teams to join you. But that doesn't touch the main reason why forts are played the way they are: Nobody wants to play with strangers that rob your loot after you have achieved the goal.

  • 6

    @khaleesibot I don't really see any requirement for it. If the concern is people quickly acquiring too much gold, reduce the amount of gold earned or release more gold sinks.

    Adding a death penalty only detracts from the incentive to do cool/crazy stuns, and incentives more griefing (not personally something I've had a huge problem with, but hey, the less satisfaction people get out of that the better)

  • 0

    @uberkull In my ideal game it would cost a couple thousand to get a new ship so it forces players who dont want to spend the money to be marooned at an island and require them to get a ride back with another crew. they would have to add a flair kind thing to call over ships and they can only get a free ship at an outpost. but this is prolly to hardcore for the game.

  • 0

    @toastywrath If someone falls to being baited then that's their issue tbh. Short of getting on someones boat and standing in front of gun fire, not many ways you can accidentally attack someone.

    Of course this will lead to more people boarding ships without firing, stealing chests and just jumping off if no one is willing to fire first. But if taking loot from another ship sets aggro. Then good.

  • 3

    @x1-two If the death tax is ONLY for PVE that would make sense. However simply increasing the respawn time would be a easier fix.

  • 1

    @toastywrath I can agree with some of your thoughts here, but not others I'm afraid. Specifically, it's not my job or yours to educate Rare's playerbase. If players, out of the goodness of their hearts, want to help others I think that's amazing. I've been down that path before and won't do it again as I found it was ineffective.

  • 5

    @keepitlowkee said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:

    Quoted from RaKKe83 from another thread which I agree on his suggestion if a death penalty was implemented

    "Our suggestion in terms of the player death cost, would be do double the respawn time, and introduce some kind of bribary of the captain of the ferry to half that back down to what it currently is. (I also saw someone mention above doing tasks onboard the ship, this is also a great idea). This would provide a pretty happy medium, and the cost remains a choice."

    This actually would make a ton of sense if it was implemented in this fashion. I wouldn't mind it at all.

  • 1

    @tangolit I’m not saying it’s your obligation and expecting that of anyone would be ridiculous. I’m only saying that it seems that a lot of the negative feedback toward this game stems from ignorance.

  • 7

    Spawning is already bad for some, Just haven't had issues myself yet. But a death cost is the worst idea right now. The game is new and people are already finding a lot of flaws so adding something negative like this to a game that suppose to be fun is a bad start. Part of the games charm for me is how i can relax and have fun with my mates and do goofy stuff that sometimes kills us or just myself. I cant think of one legitimate reason this "death Cost" should be added ever.

Locked