Evil system on PVP

[Zetetic]

The way the evil system on PVP currently works is broken. Saint not being an option in regular mud meant that the only way to get 30 evil points in a block was to attack a Lawful person. Also, the time retaliation period is not working correctly, so evil players often have to take more EP to attack the same person in the same PVP session.

The other thing is that in regular mud, if a good player performed any evil act, it immediately took them to neutral. On Greatermud they may still stay good. This is creating a situation where those that go good actually have an easier time of performing evil actions. They can attack any evil person any time they want with no penalisation, where an evil player can end up stuck at max evil and unable to act in an evil manner, or defend themselves properly.

So, I propose that we make attacking anybody that hasn't attacked you first an evil act. This means that if a Saint attacks an evil player without prior cause, they take evil points.

This would be a fairly simple modification, but I think it would improve matters as they currently stand.

[Thergin]

Saint should be removed from the pvp server.

[Torque]

This means that if a Saint attacks an evil player without prior cause, they take evil points.

This is inherently really stupid since it's not straightforward or practical logic. However, I do agree that Evil system is broke.

Instead, I suggest removing the "too evil to do this"; it is pvp afterall. Being evil does not give you prev AC, so the benefits of being good are more (but not all) PVE. In addition to removal of too evil, here are three supplemental options:

#1 Your EPs could still peg out at +201

#2 Your EPs could continue have a super distant cap of +1001 or something like this

#3 Your EPs could continue indefinitely

#4 Your EPs could be multiplied by 10% to equal the amount of "Protection from good" penalty you incur. So if you had 100 EPs, you'd get -10 PRGD. You could continue clouding a million times, as long as you're willing to manage that you're much more vulnerable to the goodies

Personally I like removal of Too Evil plus #3 & #4

[Crabster]

and the fact that someone neutral or gooder can attack me and i cant attack back cuz of being too evil....so i have to engage melee first then engage with whatever spells....thats just dumb

[Vizzion]

I agree, we need to review the system, it makes 0 sense to me that you can be 'too evil' on a PvP server to actually PvP. Combine that with the broken mechanic of when you're too evil you have to melee before you can cast damage spells and it makes for retardation.

I understand the too evil thing on mobs to avoid exploiting certain areas for exp, but you should never be too evil to attack someone on a PvP server IMO.

[MudHunter]

...I understand the too evil thing on mobs to avoid exploiting certain areas for exp, but you should never be too evil to attack someone on a PvP server IMO.

QFT

Being good (or saint) Gives people a HUGE advantage. and especially on a pvp server, its very stupid. You could have a group of 6 evils, but if theyre at 280 eps, they couldnt protect their party member because a saint is attacking someone in the party. you have to wait for them to attack you first.

This is a pvp server, and the current evil point system actually lessens the pvp that happens. Many people get to saint and theyre protected from alot of pvp.

Also you have to fix the casting problem post haste. A caster MUST engage meelee first before using their spells vs a neutral or above person. It completely handicaps the casters.

Tork's suggestions are almost certainly undoable, cept the let eps max out, but dont stopo people from doin evil things to other people. Once yer max eps, you cant kill a good npc, but you can kkill someone thats saint.

If people wanna be protected from pvp, play on the pve side.

[Torque]

Tork's suggestions are almost certainly undoable, cept the let eps max out, but dont stopo people from doin evil things to other people.

Explain your blanket reasoning and maybe a good suggestion will come about

If people wanna be protected from pvp, play on the pve side.

I never liked this argument; one tactic that I have is going good simply to let the other fools go evil, so i don't have to go evil while I'm trying to stay neutral. To go good means I am pveing only ("protecting" myself), until its possible for me to revert into pvp mode. PVP isn't just about who can cram the macros the hardest, its also about tactics and strategies, and the classic alignment system favors strategy. No, I didn't just say 'keep it the way it is', but I did imply that remarks like the above quoted don't further your self proclamation of antithesis; sounds a little whiney to me imo

[Hurricane Omega]

First off, I DON'T PVP.  You talk of strategy, the evil system is part of that strategy.  While evil, you have to be mindful of how evil you are and limit the evil actions you perform to those with the biggest impact for you.  On the rare MMUD board where PVP is allowed and I play, I ALWAYS go lawful specifically make evil players think twice about attacking me and racking up even more evil points.

[Greater]

First off, I DON'T PVP.  You talk of strategy, the evil system is part of that strategy.  While evil, you have to be mindful of how evil you are and limit the evil actions you perform to those with the biggest impact for you.  On the rare MMUD board where PVP is allowed and I play, I ALWAYS go lawful specifically make evil players think twice about attacking me and racking up even more evil points.

Many of the players on this realm don't consider that a legitimate strategy. Nevertheless, it is legitimate.

PvP realms aren't just supposed to be a giant brawl 24/7. Pvp happens along side pve, and the two are completely intertwined for the entire game. Using the alignment system to your advantage or to your opponent's disadvantage has always been part of the game. Being unable to restrain yourself from pvping at every opportunity isn't a reason to overhaul the system.

[Teferi]

Ok.  Let's make this simple.  How does MajorMUD do it?

1) If you are Good and do an evil deed you go straight to neutral. 
2) I dont think you can get to Saint in MajorMUD without op intervention.

Problem solved.

[mr sinister]

saint = fail

[Mersinary]

Ok.  Let's make this simple.  How does MajorMUD do it?

1) If you are Good and do an evil deed you go straight to neutral. 
2) I dont think you can get to Saint in MajorMUD without op intervention.

Problem solved.

I think its an option in settings if you can go saint or not?  Not sure tho.

[MudHunter]

Ok.  Let's make this simple.  How does MajorMUD do it?

1) If you are Good and do an evil deed you go straight to neutral. 
2) I dont think you can get to Saint in MajorMUD without op intervention.

Problem solved.

This would solve the problems, imo.

I dont want a complete free-for-all. What I do want is for there to be a much more equal footing. You can have someone as a saint rob you, then because they were careful, they remain good. now to get your stuff back you could go from say 100 eps to 200 in an hour just chasing them around. And end up maxed in a couple hours. Now you have a serious handicap, all because you wanted yer platinum ring back.

Fixing rob would go a long way to helping, too.

As it stands now, it IS broken.

And if you 'Dont pvp at all' Why do you play on pvp side? Just wondering...

[MudHunter]

Explain your blanket reasoning and maybe a good suggestion will come about
I never liked this argument; one tactic that I have is going good simply to let the other fools go evil, so i don't have to go evil while I'm trying to stay neutral. To go good means I am pveing only ("protecting" myself), until its possible for me to revert into pvp mode. PVP isn't just about who can cram the macros the hardest, its also about tactics and strategies, and the classic alignment system favors strategy. No, I didn't just say 'keep it the way it is', but I did imply that remarks like the above quoted don't further your self proclamation of antithesis; sounds a little whiney to me imo

We work in a system that has a programmer that doesnt do a ton of work on the server. Anything that would take alot of coding just wont happen. We need to figger out the way to make a correction that would be the least amount of work.

LIke I said int he previous post, I dont favor unlimited unrestrained pvp, but whats happening now is that you get a couple saints fucking with evils, and just 'defending themselves' gets them to max eps. now they cannot even defend themselves properly, because you create a 3-4v1 situation, because your allies cannot cloud. But the saints can do completly unrestrained pvp on the evils. No way should you be prevented from pvp by the system. Its stupid. I'm sure on pvp servers in, say, wow, you have people unable to kill foes, cuz they did too many naughty things.  ::)

Remove saint and most of this goes away. And like Tef said, if you do an evil act, neutral you go.

Tell you what, you give up all the dupes you have, and we can keep it the way it is. You ahve like 5 or 6, right?

[Mersinary]

This would solve the problems, imo.

I dont want a complete free-for-all. What I do want is for there to be a much more equal footing. You can have someone as a saint rob you, then because they were careful, they remain good. now to get your stuff back you could go from say 100 eps to 200 in an hour just chasing them around. And end up maxed in a couple hours. Now you have a serious handicap, all because you wanted yer platinum ring back.

Fixing rob would go a long way to helping, too.

As it stands now, it IS broken.

And if you 'Dont pvp at all' Why do you play on pvp side? Just wondering...

On non-pvp, it kinda sucks not being able to get items from them being protected by players using them forever, first come first serve and never lose them.  Not being able to steal death piles and so on, kinda makes for a lame game imo...Or thats how I remember it being last time I played nonpvp on gmud years ago.  Playing on pvp gives even non-pvpers more options and availability and it can just be more fun at times and a bit different.  Why hate on people that dont pvp but want to play in the pvp mud?

Saint vs Fiend, whats all the fuss about, there isnt all too much difference imo.  Being evil I figure I'm not able to walk through khaz cause the dwarves attack and kill me with ease.  Evil also doesnt allow you to script safely cause almost anybody will attack you, just learn how to setup your megamud and set hangs and all that good stuff.  But being max fiend and not being able to attack players freely is kinda a load of shit cause it limits what you're able to do pvp wise.

Saint, Good, Neutral...Well, some people are scared to gain evil points for some of the points above...Mainly not being able to script freely and being attacked by guards and sheriff and dwarves in khaz.  Saints and Good aligned are still gonna attack other saints and goods if they dont like you and/or want your gear.  But a good majority of the time they're just gonna try to stay above neutral and use it as a safety barrier.

I propose allowing max fiends to continiously attack players, I thinks it's one of the biggest downfalls to ever remain in this game.  If it's doable, and I dont see why not, it sounds easy enough imo (not that I know anything about coding and the mud code), but I think we'll see alot more players running around freely with an evil alignment.