Dueling House Proposition / Discussion

Out of Character message board for the Duel of Swords

Moderator: Staff

User avatar
Kalamere
Black Wizard
Black Wizard
Devil's Advocate

Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: Dragon's Gate
Contact:

Post by Kalamere »

I think doing a true team system is complicated and potentially not a great fit for full time regulation duels. It's more of the classically thought of dueling houses sort of thing and could be neat, but there are a number of pitfalls to it. Tracking it becomes much harder and, as was mentioned, I think it can sorta run into clique issues. Even if not truly cliquey in nature, it can give that appearance.

Even what I had proposed (which is probably more of a faction type system than a team type system) is going to be burdened with some appearance of cliquishness - just based on who the OL is and who they surround themselves with. In my mind though it would bring back some relevance to pieces of the DoS title scheme. I also kinda dig that there is a way to force change in the makeup of the teams. If a Ren. Baron takes down the OL, do we see a full team swap? Sometimes maybe, others not - but it could be interesting to see.

Don't get me wrong - I love the selective team stuff. TDL and IFL should make that obvious enough. I'm just saying for full time regulation, I don't think it's the way to go.
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 847
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Could the MVP be chosen with a little less black and white terms? Maybe have the winning team at the end vote on their own MVP. Dueling is really the big goal, but there's so many ways to contribute to events, like writing each week and coming up with fun events/threads.
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

Queen wrote:Could the MVP be chosen with a little less black and white terms? Maybe have the winning team at the end vote on their own MVP. Dueling is really the big goal, but there's so many ways to contribute to events, like writing each week and coming up with fun events/threads.
I think having a black and white method of choosing MVP is good. There is always the issue of possibly someone getting a voting block together to vote for them, etc, and it could feel somewhat cliquish, even more if there are three set teams. An MVP gained through whoever gains the most personal points is rewarding a player who did the work, though I'm sure there could be other methods to give back those who are more casual or are unable to duel as much as they'd like - so they put in effort in writing or something of the sort. Winning teams getting icons and other such things being that.
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

Kalamere wrote:I think doing a true team system is complicated and potentially not a great fit for full time regulation duels. It's more of the classically thought of dueling houses sort of thing and could be neat, but there are a number of pitfalls to it. Tracking it becomes much harder and, as was mentioned, I think it can sorta run into clique issues. Even if not truly cliquey in nature, it can give that appearance.

Even what I had proposed (which is probably more of a faction type system than a team type system) is going to be burdened with some appearance of cliquishness - just based on who the OL is and who they surround themselves with. In my mind though it would bring back some relevance to pieces of the DoS title scheme. I also kinda dig that there is a way to force change in the makeup of the teams. If a Ren. Baron takes down the OL, do we see a full team swap? Sometimes maybe, others not - but it could be interesting to see.

Don't get me wrong - I love the selective team stuff. TDL and IFL should make that obvious enough. I'm just saying for full time regulation, I don't think it's the way to go.
Yeah. I'd like it scoring to be simple if it could be, that way I can look at it for a couple minutes at the end of a week and go "Okay. This goes here and this goes here." and not possibly run into some hiccups. While I like the idea of having the titles linked to it, possibility of team swaps, should a Baron lose or the like, I'd feel odd if players felt like they had to switch to another side if a character that doesn't mesh with theirs becomes Overlord. They earned those points, and if they swap teams they are without those points. Which, is a good roleplay tool, I'll give it that.

Though if teams are, like.. Placeholder names.

Wolves Den
Lions Pride
Serpents Venom

A badguy character could go "I'm going to join Serpents Venom and become Overlord, that way my team looks better. You Warlords on the team, try and gain some titles too so we run this place."

Something like that. Maybe even a clause where gaining titles could net their team some extra points (as long as they aren't challenging one of their flock). What I'm writing is probably coming out as a jumbled mess since I have a headache right now.

I'm liking the ideas and discussion though, so please keep it up.
User avatar
Claire Gallows
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
Eternal Light

Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:03 pm
Location: Dunmovin (Outside of Rhydin City), Underwood (New Haven), or Caelum Training Center

Post by Claire Gallows »

DUEL Olivia wrote:
Queen wrote:Could the MVP be chosen with a little less black and white terms? Maybe have the winning team at the end vote on their own MVP. Dueling is really the big goal, but there's so many ways to contribute to events, like writing each week and coming up with fun events/threads.
I think having a black and white method of choosing MVP is good. There is always the issue of possibly someone getting a voting block together to vote for them, etc, and it could feel somewhat cliquish, even more if there are three set teams. An MVP gained through whoever gains the most personal points is rewarding a player who did the work, though I'm sure there could be other methods to give back those who are more casual or are unable to duel as much as they'd like - so they put in effort in writing or something of the sort. Winning teams getting icons and other such things being that.
Tbh, black and white prevents it from becoming a popularity contest like Liv said. And while writing is fine and dandy, it doesn't necessarily have an impact on IC dueling. That would be like awarding someone on a sports team the MVP award because they had the best comments posted online or something. Perhaps there could be other awards like the Miss Congeniality award lmao.
User avatar
Jake
Top Thug
Top Thug
Warlord of the Boards

Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:25 am
Location: Red Orc Brewery, a dueling venue, or the taverns of Badside
Contact:

Post by Jake »

DUEL Olivia wrote:Not to put them on the spot, but since they replied to the thread. Mallory, Jake, and Kalamere. What would your feelings be on player-created teams instead of just 3 pre-existing teams players can choose to join?
I'd treat this 1st cycle as a trial run. To shake out the bugs. Minimize the variables.

Simple structure. 3 teams (as proposed) for this beta run. If people like it, player-sponsored houses could become a thing in later iterations.

Get the scoring worked out. Avoid the cliques. Encourage broad participation.

Maybe even random team assignment of some sort to the 3 houses. (Hogwarts style)

At least, that's what I do for this 1st run.
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

Jake wrote:
DUEL Olivia wrote:Not to put them on the spot, but since they replied to the thread. Mallory, Jake, and Kalamere. What would your feelings be on player-created teams instead of just 3 pre-existing teams players can choose to join?
I'd treat this 1st cycle as a trial run. To shake out the bugs. Minimize the variables.

Simple structure. 3 teams (as proposed) for this beta run. If people like it, player-sponsored houses could become a thing in later iterations.

Get the scoring worked out. Avoid the cliques. Encourage broad participation.

Maybe even random team assignment of some sort to the 3 houses. (Hogwarts style)

At least, that's what I do for this 1st run.
Do I make a 20 question personality quiz and sort them like that? Lol. That'd be interesting.

And yeah, I see the need for a trial run. We shouldn't put the cart before the horse and all that.
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 847
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

I definitely get the argument against. The rules are speculative right now, but it feels like a grind for points. Whoever duels the most would pretty much secure mvp honors. I'm just curious if that's the environment we really want?
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

Queen wrote:I definitely get the argument against. The rules are speculative right now, but it feels like a grind for points. Whoever duels the most would pretty much secure mvp honors. I'm just curious if that's the environment we really want?
It's meant to be an add on to the existing game to promote dueling. Something where the prize isn't the end all / be all so those who might not want to join don't feel like they have to, and those who would like to add onto their dueling / roleplay with a Dueling House can participate.

MVP would, yes, be whoever grinds the most points and helps their team win (Or the top MVP of all three teams gains something, while the winning team itself gains something extra). By the way, MVP is just a placeholder term for now. It could be called House Champion or something of the like once things are fleshed out.

I'm not sure I fully follow what you are suggesting. Promoting dueling is what I'm trying to do mostly.. Writing is nice, and I would be happy to see it, but I'm trying to put two and two together to see how these two could match with one another to where a person could gain a prize benefit on par with someone who dueled to become the head of an MVP race. You'd have to go into more detail of what you mean and use an example.
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 847
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

I'm really suggesting an award for someone who felt like the most valuable player. Wins and losses and duels are the goal, I totally understand. But a lot of what helps these events succeed is a lot of tertiary input. People who feel that a player dueled a bit, maybe not the most, but helped the team coalesce could be valued. Just a thought.
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

I don't think there's any problem with having a thing like that. Maybe award them a special icon or something. This character cheered us on, they fought the best they could, etc, they really helped make this season fun, what have you. I wouldn't see an issue with giving some recognition to that. It can also easily be done by those on the team itself, maybe coming together and having a vote among all of them and choosing their most valuable player.

Examples being,

House Champions - Top point earners of each house.
House Knights (Or something else) - Second and third place of the earners of each house.

MVP (Placeholder / Something non-MVP would sound probably better) - Voted on by each team.

It'd then be like "Ok how do we tally votes" but I assume a 7 day wait period and asking people to private message me their votes is viable.

The thing I'd like to point out. Special honors could easily be done by the participants themselves. I'd just like to have a black/white baseline of who would win something game-related. Example: IFL Coordinator awarding someone the Kiowa Belt, compared to Harris doing an MVP vote. One is coordinator, the other is a member of the community. One is a gain for fighting next season, the other is bragging rights.
User avatar
Kalamere
Black Wizard
Black Wizard
Devil's Advocate

Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: Dragon's Gate
Contact:

Post by Kalamere »

Olivia wrote:While I like the idea of having the titles linked to it, possibility of team swaps, should a Baron lose or the like, I'd feel odd if players felt like they had to switch to another side if a character that doesn't mesh with theirs becomes Overlord. They earned those points, and if they swap teams they are without those points. Which, is a good roleplay tool, I'll give it that.
That IS sorta how the feudal system works though. Spend your life as a Duke building up your lands and making improvements and then the King you were loyal to gets taken down in a coup, there's a very good chance you get tossed out (probably killed) and lose all that work. It's the risk of loyalty. Now, that said, there's no reason you can't track player points separately from team/faction points. So, while your contributions may ultimately benefit a side you are no longer a part of, you could still win individual honors.
Hope wrote:I definitely get the argument against. The rules are speculative right now, but it feels like a grind for points. Whoever duels the most would pretty much secure mvp honors. I'm just curious if that's the environment we really want?
This was the primary reason I suggested nightly / weekly caps on aspects of the scoring. Making it a point grind (a) risks burning out those who do the grinding (which is probably the last thing we want to see - losing more people from burnout) and (b) turns off some of those who don't. In some of the big games (EQ back in the day, WoW, etc) I definitely saw a level of separation and contention between casual players and hard core players. It's almost like another form of the cliquishness discussed earlier and I think best avoided.

Dueling is pretty much at an all time low right now. Encourage 2 duels, or 2 wins, a week and I think that is more than enough to start growing some dueling without over doing it. You don't need Hydra style 20 duels a week kinda efforts. Make it simple.
User avatar
Jake
Top Thug
Top Thug
Warlord of the Boards

Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:25 am
Location: Red Orc Brewery, a dueling venue, or the taverns of Badside
Contact:

Post by Jake »

Spitballing some thoughts on goals/scoring...

Goals

Encourage dueling
Low barrier to entry
Avoid appearance of cliques
Trial run for something that might become regular

Houses

3 houses, with duelers assigned randomly to each house (to ensure each house has an equivalent # of participants)
New duelists can be added to a team anywhere in the cycle following the same randomization rules

Scoring

1 pt for dueling
+1 pt for a win
+1 pt for dueling an opponent of a different house
+1 pt for beating an opponent of a different house
+1 pt for winning a shut-out

Minimum score for a duel: 1 (losing a duel against someone in the same house)
1 for duel
Maximum score for a duel: 5 (winning a duel against someone in another house by SO)
1 for duel, +1 for winning, +1 for another team, +1 for beating another team, +1 for SO

Maximum # of duels / night: 2

May not fight the same opponent twice in the same night (can fight them again tomorrow)

Awards
Longest string of nights dueled? <-- discourage as it could lead to burnout?
Most duels/wins <-- could also lead to burnout?
*Most SOs
*Best MPDPD (as per TDL) it's not the # of duels that counts, with min. # of duels = # of weeks in cycle(/2?)?
*Faced the greatest # of unique opponents

---

Kal suggested some maxs in his post. Maybe max # of duels per week...and/or simple max # of points per week?
Tho' that leaves the loophole of alts

---

ETA: Addendum: There might be folks that, for whatever reason, don't want to be part of a house. In that event, scoring would be the same as that of dueling in-house. 1 for the duel +1 for a win for the house member (+1 for a shut-out). No points for the dueler who isn't in a house.
Doesn't hurt the house dueler to duel a non-house dueler, and there's still incentive to duel. Non-house dueler isn't hurting or helping anyone.
Last edited by Jake on Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DUEL Olivia
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:39 pm

Post by DUEL Olivia »

Really like the ideas Jake. I think something along those lines would be a good start for a test-run. 3 Starting teams and a more basic approach I think is the best idea to start with, and once the first one is over we can see what went wrong / what went right and hammer out some changes as things go on for the next.

I think a duel-cap is a good idea to cut off on spam dueling.. Hydra had something along that line, where it was only your four best duels counted, but even that caused burnout since we had players ( myself included ) grinding out duels to see if they could get 5-1's and 5-0's for their final scores. So taking that idea and making it instead your first 2 duels of any given nights are automatically counted, while anything after isn't, could be a good way to curb that. Once more, I'd like this to be just an add-on to the existing game and not something anyone feels they have to sit and grind things out for, which is why I also like Jake's suggestions for choosing awards, even the ones that *might* be seen as discouraging, like the longest string of nights dueled. If it's one among many, different types of duelists can choose to sit one award out and focus on another.

What if there's only members of your team out that night for dueling? You might get smaller points, but that's still points none the less - and still an edge over another team if they aren't around that night. If it does become a bit of an issue it can be monitored and looked into for next cycle.

I'm not sure about the alt question. We can't really check who is on what alts, outside of the ones attached to their discord names, but I think allowing someone who wants to jump around on alts to fight is fine, as long as there's the daily cap for each character.

Team cap per week.. I'm not sure, I'd like everyone who comes out to duel on a team to feel like they are contributing in a way. I wouldn't want someone seeing their team is capped out on points this week and be like "Well I can sit back and not have to duel." and another team loses an opponent to fight.
User avatar
Eden Parker
RoH Admin
RoH Admin
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 8:35 pm
Location: Old Market

Post by Eden Parker »

Sorry for chiming in late, but I just wanted to say I love this idea. I'm not adept at game dynamics, so I leave the points/rules decisions to you all.

But I do think a randomized assignment of teams actually sounds really fun to me because it encourages random and new IC connections. Pretty much everything Claire said. I totally see it in the vein of Hogwart's houses or summer camp color wars and I think that could be great fun.

I like it!
Post Reply

Return to “Duel of Swords (OOC)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests