False Sense of Security With Prelude

[KeithStone]

we all know that during prelude tribe territories are going to be safe zones for the tribe members.

I'm not trying to say that it shouldn't be this way, but I wanted to point out some problems with this.

1. All the really small tribes will get sieged and removed as soon as prelude is over and wars/sieges are added.
2. Tribes will get so used to not having to worry about raiders that when the prelude is over their is going to be the worse QQ this forum has seen about the tribes who don't like getting pk'd on their territory.
3. Without the ability to currently siege tribes, many will go stagnant and block valuable land. See my other thread for this topic: http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3755-Tribes-and-Settlements-that-go-inactive

There has been talk about adding a 2nd server for those that want the ability to raid other tribes and be raided themselves. (this will greatly divide the community imo)

As soon as prelude is over for the current server the people who hate being on a FFA game will rage that there is already a FFA server why do we need to ruin the current server. (not saying that is my stance, it's just what I beleive will be argued on the forums)

Also, because of the inability to raid other tribes on their territory, pretty much any tribe that doesn't get access to scrap piles during the post wipe land rush within their tribe territory is just going to be screwed for scrap. This is just another thing that's going to hurt the community when prelude is over, the tribes who have been so used to their personal scrap piles will have to start dealing with raiders and will bring more QQ to the forums.

Problems I foresee with Settlements:

1. If these are permanent peices of property, then why shouldn't we all just make a settlement.
2. If they can eventually be sieged, how do you protect a 1 man settlement against a large tribe. Eventually there would be no settlements because everyone would know that you would just lose it to a "zerg" tribe. Even if you make it so that only someone with a settlement can attack a settlement then you get tribe members dropping tribes to create settlements to initiate the siege for their tribe.

Just some things we all need to think about.

[Raye]

1. All the really small tribes will get sieged and removed as soon as prelude is over and wars/sieges are added.



But this wont be implemented for a long time from what ive read, so they have a long time to build up, form nearby alliances/friendships and whatnot. :)

[Doc]

Focus is on rebuliding the world, not creating another apocalyose, you should start with that premise on your mind.

In case of "inactive totems" theres a lot of ways to deal with that, if "player(s) associated with totem are inactive for >30 (or 60 or whatever they fid appropriate) days, totem self-destructs.

[Eremon]

As soon as prelude is over for the current server the people who hate being on a FFA game will rage that there is already a FFA server why do we need to ruin the current server.

Xsyon will lose a significant amount of the population if Safe Zones are removed and a complete Open FFA Pvp system is implemented. Word will then spread that this game is nothing more than MO, Darkfall, Shadowbane etc.

It really comes down to what type of game Jordi envisions, but more importantly, what type of subscriber base he wishes to obtain, and keep.

Personally, if I lose the "safe haven" of my little homestead in the mountains, I'll just leave... no raging.

I don't oppose PvP, I just won't play in an environment that has unrestrained PvP.

[natehamm]

ok after reading your post this is what i feel that u want. 1 u want to be able to gank newbies as they spawn into game at starter points.2 u want tribe areas to not be safe areas so u can never harvest and just walk into a small tribes area and steal all their stuff just cause they dont got 50 people.

now this isnt a flame its just the way i feel when i read your post is all.jooky already said the reason for safe areas is to prevent greifing. its the thingg that bugs ffa pvp games the most is people who kill someone just to ruin their day not for loot or skill or stats but just to ruin their day. reason tribe areas are safe is to allow for a war system betwen tribes not to let a long guy go into a small tribes area and greif them.

once he opens more lands some tribes will move around to get better spots.

[KeithStone]

But this wont be implemented for a long time from what ive read, so they have a long time to build up, form nearby alliances/friendships and whatnot. :)

that's where you are missing my point I think- the false sense of security will keep these tribes from making many allies, I see this causing many problems for the player base after prelude.

[KeithStone]

ok after reading your post this is what i feel that u want. 1 u want to be able to gank newbies as they spawn into game at starter points.2 u want tribe areas to not be safe areas so u can never harvest and just walk into a small tribes area and steal all their stuff just cause they dont got 50 people.

now this isnt a flame its just the way i feel when i read your post is all.jooky already said the reason for safe areas is to prevent greifing. its the thingg that bugs ffa pvp games the most is people who kill someone just to ruin their day not for loot or skill or stats but just to ruin their day. reason tribe areas are safe is to allow for a war system betwen tribes not to let a long guy go into a small tribes area and greif them.

once he opens more lands some tribes will move around to get better spots.

I don't know if you know this- but after prelude this game is going to a FFA pvp open world game. This isn't something I'm askign for- that's just how it is.

And no, i don't want to gank noobs at starting zones- i've already made a suggestion to jooky about having a 30 min to 1 hour new player protection timer so that sort of thing can't happen.

Also, this post isn't about stating what I want- it's about discussing the possible repurcussions of what's to come from what has already been said to be happening after prelude. The only thing I haven't seen anything talked about is what happens to settlements after prelude.

[rixk]

Xsyon will lose a significant amount of the population if Safe Zones are removed and a complete Open FFA Pvp system is implemented. Word will then spread that this game is nothing more than MO, Darkfall, Shadowbane etc.
...

This.. There are different playstyles and if safezones will be removed, then every playstyles sole purpose will be to entertain certain "PvP-ers". Why I put PvP-ers into quotation marks? Simply because those who are actually interested in PvP can do that even now, those who are lobbying for removal of safezones, just want more opportunities to get easy kills.

[galagah]

Xsyon will lose a significant amount of the population if Safe Zones are removed and a complete Open FFA Pvp system is implemented. Word will then spread that this game is nothing more than MO, Darkfall, Shadowbane etc.

It really comes down to what type of game Jordi envisions, but more importantly, what type of subscriber base he wishes to obtain, and keep.

Personally, if I lose the "safe haven" of my little homestead in the mountains, I'll just leave... no raging.

I don't oppose PvP, I just won't play in an environment that has unrestrained PvP.

I'm of the same mind here .

I enjoy PvP , how-ever i don't like having it constantly rammed down my throat , and would like to be able to take a break in a safe area as and when i feel like it .
Currently the game is perfect in that i can run around knowing i'm at risk of being attacked from not just Wildlife but other players at anypoint , while at the same time having the peace of mind that i can go to my homestead to craft / fish and take a break from being " at risk " when i choose to .

This to me is ideal , and should be kept . What i would like to see is Expansion lands being fought over rather than " Base " settlements .

[KeithStone]

This.. There are different playstyles and if safezones will be removed, then every playstyles sole purpose will be to entertain certain "PvP-ers". Why I put PvP-ers into quotation marks? Simply because those who are actually interested in PvP can do that even now, those who are lobbying for removal of safezones, just want more opportunities to get easy kills.

It's not a lobby against safe zone- that's why I made this post- and you just proved it to me- you already have a false sense of security- after prelude THERE WILL BE NO SAFE ZONES.

[Aethaeryn]

Do we know what sieging will look like? Do we know you will be able to attack a tribe with no notice and completely destroy it? Will there be timers? I hope it won't be quite as open and instant as 50 guys rolling through an areas wiping everyone out while they are offline. I could be wrong though.

EDIT: Okay it says safe zones only through prelude. It also suggests that during prelude new features will be added. Hopefully some of these will be defensive in nature. I am a PvPer but I also realize that while open PvP is "realistic" people not being online is not. There has to be some way to protect a tribe or the offensive tribe will always win because they will be prepared. And after tribe A destroys tribe B while they are offline - tribe B will do the same to A at some point. We will end up with an empty world of roaming gankers.

I agree with your point. If it is implemented that way people are going to freak out for sure. The truth is I have already invested time into games like that DF, MO etc. so I am looking for something a little different here. Not that I won't play it but I would like to see the PvP a little more organized and goal based than that. Here's to hoping the Devs have some ideas planned.

[KeithStone]

Do we know what sieging will look like? Do we know you will be able to attack a tribe with no notice and completely destroy it? Will there be timers? I hope it won't be quite as open and instant as 50 guys rolling through an areas wiping everyone out while they are offline. I could be wrong though.

EDIT: Okay it says safe zones only through prelude. It also suggests that during prelude new features will be added. Hopefully some of these will be defensive in nature. I am a PvPer but I also realize that while open PvP is "realistic" people not being online is not. There has to be some way to protect a tribe or the offensive tribe will always win because they will be prepared. And after tribe A destroys tribe B while they are offline - tribe B will do the same to A at some point. We will end up with an empty world of roaming gankers.

I agree with your point. If it is implemented that way people are going to freak out for sure. The truth is I have already invested time into games like that DF, MO etc. so I am looking for something a little different here. Not that I won't play it but I would like to see the PvP a little more organized and goal based than that. Here's to hoping the Devs have some ideas planned.

Thank you, finally someone understands what I'm talking about- it will really help you guys to read the part where Aethaeryn put in the EDIT- then my post will make more sense to you all.

[Jadzia]

@OP:

1. It isn't announced how tribe sieges will work. Its only your assumption that it will be FFA PvP. Thats very very unlikely IMO.
2. Absolutely agree. Thats why Jordi plans to add options to build defenses around our towns, walls and gates. If they don't give minimum 95% of protection there will be an uproar for sure.
3. I don't agree.

Check the poll about safe zones in game. 75% of the players voted on keeping them. I know they voted on safe zones during Prelude, not in general, and that forum community doesn't represent the whole game community...still it shows something. Let's say only 50% of the community wants constant safe zones and optional tribe sieges. These 50% will leave if the game turn into a Darkfall type game (which Jordi stated would never happen). The other 50% who wants a free FFA PvP game will leave if the safe zones stay.

Now whats the solution ? I'm sure Jordi don't want to lose half of his playerbase, whichever half would it be. Thats why he stated from the very beginning that if there was a demand, he would set up 2 different servers with different PvP rules, one for FFA and one with safe zones. Is this the best solution ? I don't think so. But better than lose half of the players.

This is what I would like to see after Prelude:
1. The Prelude area stays as it is now, with an option for the tribe to flag for sieges and to switch off their safety.
2. The green mist disappears and that gives us a much bigger playground. Let's say the ancient gods got mad because of the chaos and decided to keep half of the new land safe. That area would be a big safe zone, just like Eve's high sec space. No tribe sieges, a player can attack and kill another one but if he do so an angel appears and insta kill him.
3. The other half of the new land become an outlaw area. Tribes who settle there can siege and kill and destroy each others as much as they like. No PvP penalties there, PvPers can enjoy fighting without any punishment. Resource gathering should result double or triple as much resources as in safe zones to help people to survive there. Outlaw and safe zone players shouldn't be allowed to trade with each others.
There should be rare things which can only be found in the outlaw area. Let's say high level very rare recipe books. This way the safe zones players would go there to search for them giving the opportunity the outlaw players to fight new enemies.

This is only my opinion and my view of course :) I'm not expecting anyone to agree with it.

[rixk]

It's not a lobby against safe zone- that's why I made this post- and you just proved it to me- you already have a false sense of security- after prelude THERE WILL BE NO SAFE ZONES.

Currently I am having very real sense of security, thank you.. I have already shown finger emote to someone, who tried to gank me while I was fishing in my homestead ;)
There is also long time until prelude will be over, nothing is set in stone.

But as Jordi has said in one of his interview: "What sets Xsyon apart is a focus on building and creating a new world and not relying on PvP as the driving force. The Xsyon setting is also based on reality and not a fantasy universe. This gives us the opportunity to introduce real locations and later historical lore to make Xsyon a somewhat educational experience.".
Removing safezones would have totally opposite effect to what he is trying to achieve. So I am quite sure, that even if the safezones will be removed, then killing someone at their tribe area will be very undesireable act to do.

[Mishima]

As I've understood it, we'll see tribal warfare after prelude, not simply the removal of every safezone in the whole game.

The only sensible thing imho would be to implement this as some kind of consensual system, i.e. as war declarations - meaning tribes that wish to siege and be sieged, and to engage in asset destruction, can do this to their heart's content, at the same time letting people who have no interest in such activities stay safe in their own lands. The war decs do not necessarily have to be totally consensual ofc (war is pretty useless if your opponent has to agree to it); perhaps it could only be possible to declare war on another tribe as a result of certain acts of aggression, theft or border violation, or something like that.

A game like this needs some restrictions when it comes to PvP, otherwise it'll go down fast and only leave those who enjoy PvPing 24/7. Since there are no NPC areas, players not wanting to risk their assets should not be forced to be online all the time just to keep them safe. If every safezone is removed, only large tribed that can keep people logged on around the clock will remain.

[Chavoda]

Save zones Will go, what is not very clearly stated is how the game will evolve toward tribe conquering.
In my view and how I read all the bits of info scattered around it will be so that core tribe land will never be destroyed. the save zone is gone and hostile tribes can come and pull your panties over your head, steal resource piles, perhaps even thief from containers whit the appropriate skills but not destroy your core land.
The fights will be for the extended land.

Resources while great to have right now in prelude next door will not remain, by the time save zones removed we probably will see a mayor land shift as tribes will try to claim spots closer to mines and other natural resources.

For most big PvP tribes its not even about resources but about fame, about dropping a flag somewhere and saying -we own this!- I personalty hope that one day we will see a mechanic were tribes can form alliances under the same flag and say (whit game mechanic support) this is our land, work whit us if you live here and be save, work against us and be raised each night. ( aka middle ages) this could be reflected by some kind of nice pole whit a flag waving in the air showing the colors of the alliance/tribe that has the claim on the area. and laws set by them count of the entire territory they have claim on.

In MO technical issues aside we saw a lot of smaller clans and roaming bands dissolve melt whit this bigger boys as it would and should go naturally. the same will happen in Xsyon.

The lack of save zones after prelude is a well known fact anyone forming up solo or ina tribe knows this and while some players live in lala land most that i seen play testing are well aware of this and forming up friendly relations even the PK's are talking in chat like "hey see ya later i'm going to kill some folks over at the other side of the lake" they are well aware that roaming their own neighborhood hood ain't the most smart idea.

I can understand were your coming from but right now its way way way to early to tell how things will work out.

Edit: hmm I have to correct this while I look for for some info. while unknown how..tribes can be destroyed by other tribes as stated in a old awnser/question session.

seems I was on the rumor mill myself hahaha

[KeithStone]

@OP:

1. It isn't announced how tribe sieges will work. Its only your assumption that it will be FFA PvP. Thats very very unlikely IMO.
2. Absolutely agree. Thats why Jordi plans to add options to build defenses around our towns, walls and gates. If they don't give minimum 95% of protection there will be an uproar for sure.
3. I don't agree.

Check the poll about safe zones in game. 75% of the players voted on keeping them. I know they voted on safe zones during Prelude, not in general, and that forum community doesn't represent the whole game community...still it shows something. Let's say only 50% of the community wants constant safe zones and optional tribe sieges. These 50% will leave if the game turn into a Darkfall type game (which Jordi stated would never happen). The other 50% who wants a free FFA PvP game will leave if the safe zones stay.

Now whats the solution ? I'm sure Jordi don't want to lose half of his playerbase, whichever half would it be. Thats why he stated from the very beginning that if there was a demand, he would set up 2 different servers with different PvP rules, one for FFA and one with safe zones. Is this the best solution ? I don't think so. But better than lose half of the players.

This is what I would like to see after Prelude:
1. The Prelude area stays as it is now, with an option for the tribe to flag for sieges and to switch off their safety.
2. The green mist disappears and that gives us a much bigger playground. Let's say the ancient gods got mad because of the chaos and decided to keep half of the new land safe. That area would be a big safe zone, just like Eve's high sec space. No tribe sieges, a player can attack and kill another one but if he do so an angel appears and insta kill him.
3. The other half of the new land become an outlaw area. Tribes who settle there can siege and kill and destroy each others as much as they like. No PvP penalties there, PvPers can enjoy fighting without any punishment. Resource gathering should result double or triple as much resources as in safe zones to help people to survive there. Outlaw and safe zone players shouldn't be allowed to trade with each others.
There should be rare things which can only be found in the outlaw area. Let's say high level very rare recipe books. This way the safe zones players would go there to search for them giving the opportunity the outlaw players to fight new enemies.

This is only my opinion and my view of course :) I'm not expecting anyone to agree with it.

Response to your points:

1. It's not my assumption that it will be FFA PVP - it has been stated this way - when I say FFA i'm talking about the ability to attack someone anywhere, even on tribal territory - with consequences of course for being a pk.
3. There will be tribes that go inactive between now and the end of prelude, it's just a matter of time.

Being a "good" tribe isn't going to give your territory a free ticket for not getting pk'd inside your tribe lands after prelude.

[Imhotep]

safezone must go after prelude or there will be no endgame, politics and economy. the only future of the time of peace is indeed a WAR

[bruisie159]

My understanding is this...and I don't know where I got this info from!
FFA pvp will happen anywhere (with consequences) but initial home tribe lands/settlements will not be captured or destroyed only secondary land in resource rich new area can be claimed and fought over.

Not saying this is right just what I thought was true. Some official confirmation is needed for sure.

[JCatano]

My understanding is this...and I don't know where I got this info from!
FFA pvp will happen anywhere (with consequences) but initial home tribe lands/settlements will not be captured or destroyed only secondary land in resource rich new area can be claimed and fought over.

Not saying this is right just what I thought was true. Some official confirmation is needed for sure.

The only way I'd agree with that is if the current area was the only place you could have a tribe town safe from conquering (not PvP) mechanics. The area would also need to be less desirable. Low on resources, newbie mobs, and no higher tier perks. Basically, a starter area.

[Jadzia]

Response to your points:

1. It's not my assumption that it will be FFA PVP - it has been stated this way - when I say FFA i'm talking about the ability to attack someone anywhere, even on tribal territory - with consequences of course for being a pk.

I didn't mean tribe safe zones, in your OP you mentioned tribe sieges and small tribes/homesteads being destroyed after Prelude...I meant that the tribe siege mechanic (aka destroying other tribe villages) won't be FFA PvP.

[KeithStone]

I didn't mean tribe safe zones, in your OP you mentioned tribe sieges and small tribes/homesteads being destroyed after Prelude...I meant that the tribe siege mechanic (aka destroying other tribe villages) won't be FFA PvP.

direct from the FAQ

Can architecture structures be damaged by other players at any time?
As the game evolves yes. This won't be in for a while as towns are planned as safe zones in the Prelude, though I am considered tribes to allow to choose if they want to be warring tribes during the Prelude. Warring tribes will be able to attack each other.

When will we be able to raid other tribes? And what systems are you planning for that?
Not for a while. This was planned for after the Prelude, which will last at least 6 months. When a raiding system is implemented I will first look at what other games do and what systems have had success.

Raiding is coming, how it will work is yet to be seen.

I still think most of you are missing the point of my OP, after prelude when all the current safe zones are no longer 100% safe- it's going to cause confusion.

Nowhere in my OP did I state that I wanted it to be a certain way, if it sounds that way it wasn't my intentions.

I was only trying to state that there will be confusion after prelude based on how things are setup now and how it will be after.

[zettoz]

I don't think it will end up being that bad, the solo players will have to form alliances with surrounding neighbors and tribes for protection or risk being eliminated. This is a social game, if you don't have friends you will inevitably die, just like RL, whoever has the more friends and the bigger stick wins.

[JCatano]

I didn't mean tribe safe zones, in your OP you mentioned tribe sieges and small tribes/homesteads being destroyed after Prelude...I meant that the tribe siege mechanic (aka destroying other tribe villages) won't be FFA PvP.

Really? Fact or wishful thinking?

How is this...

KeithStone asks

After prelude- will tribes be able to conquer other tribe lands by destroying their totem?

Yes. How this will work is not fully decided yet. Since we first started working on Xsyon, many games have come out with some good ideas for this type of warfare. We're going to spend some time checking these out before we implement what we think is the best solution.

---

KeithStone asks:

Can architecture structures be damaged by other players at any time?

As the game evolves yes. This won't be in for a while as towns are planned as safe zones in the Prelude, though I am considered tribes to allow to choose if they want to be warring tribes during the Prelude. Warring tribes will be able to attack each other.

---

...not "FFA"?

Do you really think two tribes are going to have to mutually agree to fight?

Anyone who wanted to siege my tribe would get a "We do not agree!" from me... Ha...ha...?

[FabricSoftener]

direct from the FAQ

Can architecture structures be damaged by other players at any time?
As the game evolves yes. This won't be in for a while as towns are planned as safe zones in the Prelude, though I am considered tribes to allow to choose if they want to be warring tribes during the Prelude. Warring tribes will be able to attack each other.

When will we be able to raid other tribes? And what systems are you planning for that?
Not for a while. This was planned for after the Prelude, which will last at least 6 months. When a raiding system is implemented I will first look at what other games do and what systems have had success.

Raiding is coming, how it will work is yet to be seen.

I still think most of you are missing the point of my OP, after prelude when all the current safe zones are no longer 100% safe- it's going to cause confusion.

Nowhere in my OP did I state that I wanted it to be a certain way, if it sounds that way it wasn't my intentions.

I was only trying to state that there will be confusion after prelude based on how things are setup now and how it will be after.

1. When the developer themselves are not 100% sure how they plan to implement something its the gaming communities own fault if they get 'confused'.
2. You could tell the gaming community 'the wipe will come sometimes before march 1st' and then read in public chat 'we are still in beta offical release is on march 1st'. Not confusing the gaming community is impossible

[Jadzia]

After prelude- will tribes be able to conquer other tribe lands by destroying their totem?

Yes. How this will work is not fully decided yet

---

...not "FFA"?

Do you really think two tribes are going to have to mutually agree to fight?

As you see its not decided yet. Yes, I think it won't be FFA. Thats my opinion, you don't have to agree. I'm willing to bet though :P

It can be mutual agreement, or flagged for war. If you want to siege others, you have to be vulnerable against sieges too. But as far as things goes now the most likely solution will be 2 different servers...which is sad IMO.

[KeithStone]

As you see its not decided yet. Yes, I think it won't be FFA. Thats my opinion, you don't have to agree. I'm willing to bet though :P

It can be mutual agreement, or flagged for war. If you want to siege others, you have to be vulnerable against sieges too. But as far as things goes now the most likely solution will be 2 different servers...which is sad IMO.

you only highlighted what you want to see- the first part is a big Yes. a mutual war doesn't make sense at all.

Also, when you have tribes sitting on 100% of the scrap piles, and you can't attack the tribe that's there- that just screws every other tribe not sitting on a scrap pile.

But again, I will state that my post is about the confusion to come.

and how we can avoid it. you guys are totally getting off the subject by trying to debate what FFA is going to mean in this game.

[BigCountry]

FFA PvP and The ability to lose your land needs to be implemented sooner than the later if you ask me.

The world needs to shape in accordance to how people are going to play/expect the world to be. Or else it will form in a non-natural way.

For example, if FFA PvP were in place right now, which it should be, we would ALL be fortifying our territories with walls, water (or some sort of security mechanism). And that's exactly what would happen if this were RL - the first thing to do would be security to protect yourself and your belongings. This is post apoc last time I checked....we are not pilgram settlers....look at the logo/graphic up top for crying out loud, hehe

FFA PvP would cause people to ban together, start cities, start government, start politics, declare wars, etc. It's just the way of things.

ATM I do not see how a random spawn of racoons or bears is going to do that.
:(

Xsyon mentioned 2 servers, a PvE and a PvP. Perhaps with all the lag/leaks we experienced, maybe it would not be such a bad idea to wipe with 2 servers, a FFA PvP and a PvE. He makes money with both and everyone is happy.

[FabricSoftener]

you only highlighted what you want to see- the first part is a big Yes. a mutual war doesn't make sense at all.

Also, when you have tribes sitting on 100% of the scrap piles, and you can't attack the tribe that's there- that just screws every other tribe not sitting on a scrap pile.

But again, I will state that my post is about the confusion to come.

and how we can avoid it. you guys are totally getting off the subject by trying to debate what FFA is going to mean in this game.

again, the developer cleary writes 'there maybe a wipe before march 1st' and I read in public chat saying ' we are still in beta the offical release is march 1st'

How do we avoid the confusion? donate to your public school or start a 'how to read' class after work.

[KeithStone]

How do we avoid the confusion? donate to your public school or start a 'how to read' class after work.

lol

[mgilbrtsn]

@OP:

1. It isn't announced how tribe sieges will work. Its only your assumption that it will be FFA PvP. Thats very very unlikely IMO.
2. Absolutely agree. Thats why Jordi plans to add options to build defenses around our towns, walls and gates. If they don't give minimum 95% of protection there will be an uproar for sure.
3. I don't agree.

Check the poll about safe zones in game. 75% of the players voted on keeping them. I know they voted on safe zones during Prelude, not in general, and that forum community doesn't represent the whole game community...still it shows something. Let's say only 50% of the community wants constant safe zones and optional tribe sieges. These 50% will leave if the game turn into a Darkfall type game (which Jordi stated would never happen). The other 50% who wants a free FFA PvP game will leave if the safe zones stay.

Now whats the solution ? I'm sure Jordi don't want to lose half of his playerbase, whichever half would it be. Thats why he stated from the very beginning that if there was a demand, he would set up 2 different servers with different PvP rules, one for FFA and one with safe zones. Is this the best solution ? I don't think so. But better than lose half of the players.

This is what I would like to see after Prelude:
1. The Prelude area stays as it is now, with an option for the tribe to flag for sieges and to switch off their safety.
2. The green mist disappears and that gives us a much bigger playground. Let's say the ancient gods got mad because of the chaos and decided to keep half of the new land safe. That area would be a big safe zone, just like Eve's high sec space. No tribe sieges, a player can attack and kill another one but if he do so an angel appears and insta kill him.
3. The other half of the new land become an outlaw area. Tribes who settle there can siege and kill and destroy each others as much as they like. No PvP penalties there, PvPers can enjoy fighting without any punishment. Resource gathering should result double or triple as much resources as in safe zones to help people to survive there. Outlaw and safe zone players shouldn't be allowed to trade with each others.
There should be rare things which can only be found in the outlaw area. Let's say high level very rare recipe books. This way the safe zones players would go there to search for them giving the opportunity the outlaw players to fight new enemies.

This is only my opinion and my view of course :) I'm not expecting anyone to agree with it.

here, here, 100% agee

[KeithStone]

FFA PvP and The ability to lose your land needs to be implemented sooner than the later if you ask me.

The world needs to shape in accordance to how people are going to play/expect the world to be. Or else it will form in a non-natural way.

For example, if FFA PvP were in place right now, which it should be, we would ALL be fortifying our territories with walls, water (or some sort of security mechanism). And that's exactly what would happen if this were RL - the first thing to do would be security to protect yourself and your belongings. This is post apoc last time I checked....we are not pilgram settlers....look at the logo/graphic up top for crying out loud, hehe

FFA PvP would cause people to ban together, start cities, start government, start politics, declare wars, etc. It's just the way of things.

ATM I do not see how a random spawn of racoons or bears is going to do that.
:(

Xsyon mentioned 2 servers, a PvE and a PvP. Perhaps with all the lag/leaks we experienced, maybe it would not be such a bad idea to wipe with 2 servers, a FFA PvP and a PvE. He makes money with both and everyone is happy.

I totally agree with this- something needs to happen sooner than later, or the community is going to be extemely divided in a bad way after prelude imo.

[scambammer]

/signed

valid and scary concerns op....I thought the prelude was merely a 'cold war' before they place some sieging into the game...

[Doc]

The only way I'd agree with that is if the current area was the only place you could have a tribe town safe from conquering (not PvP) mechanics. The area would also need to be less desirable. Low on resources, newbie mobs, and no higher tier perks. Basically, a starter area.

Thats the general idea for game longevity instead being quick money-grab like some other games... :)


I totally agree with this- something needs to happen sooner than later, or the community is going to be extemely divided in a bad way after prelude imo.

Yah, half of the community is in total dnial, although we dont know which half ;P

[Jadzia]

I totally agree with this- something needs to happen sooner than later, or the community is going to be extemely divided in a bad way after prelude imo.

The community is already divided and confused :) We have too few info about how the game will work after Prelude, and even these infos are read differently. But since Jordi hasn't decided yet how it will work, there is not much we can do. We can guess and assume things but these will be nothing more than guesses. There is only one thing he said: he will set up 2 different servers with different PvP rules (not PvE/PvP, but chaotic PvP/safe zones-PvP zones one) if there is a demand for that.

[Towel]

FFA PvP and The ability to lose your land needs to be implemented sooner than the later if you ask me.

The world needs to shape in accordance to how people are going to play/expect the world to be. Or else it will form in a non-natural way.

For example, if FFA PvP were in place right now, which it should be, we would ALL be fortifying our territories with walls, water (or some sort of security mechanism). And that's exactly what would happen if this were RL - the first thing to do would be security to protect yourself and your belongings. This is post apoc last time I checked....we are not pilgram settlers....look at the logo/graphic up top for crying out loud, hehe

FFA PvP would cause people to ban together, start cities, start government, start politics, declare wars, etc. It's just the way of things.

ATM I do not see how a random spawn of racoons or bears is going to do that.
:(

Xsyon mentioned 2 servers, a PvE and a PvP. Perhaps with all the lag/leaks we experienced, maybe it would not be such a bad idea to wipe with 2 servers, a FFA PvP and a PvE. He makes money with both and everyone is happy.

This coming from a guy who sat at the newbie spawn point, killing the same person over and over about 7 times with 4 friends? lol. Ironic at best. Not saying I care, I had logged in for the first time and was learning controls and what to do. I just find it slightly hypocritical.

[fishFUNK]

I like how some of you preach of how its going to be after the prelude like its the gospel. This game is constantly evolving and I have a sneaking suspicion that things that jooky said 4 months ago arent going to ring true 6 months from now.

[dumdidum]

I am getting sick and tired of posts about game-changing suggestions.
The game is what the game is, and if you like it you play it, where as you dont like it you move on or dont start at all.

[ifireallymust]

It's only a few days in to a ruleset that is supposed to last at least six months, and many of you are already riled up and trying to get the timetable altered so you can kill anyone, anywhere. So maybe you need to go start a poll regarding the creation of an FFA server separate from the one we're all on now. Don't have a vote 'no' option if you can help it, just have people who want the FFA server ASAP vote 'yes' and everyone else can keep their opinions to themselves. If you can't do that with the poll feature, show up in the thread and vote by post. That would at least give the devs an idea what percentage of the population wants another server with a different ruleset.

Or maybe there would be a way to open up a free for all patch of land on the current server for you all to start out on, with the same resources as the original. I have no idea how difficult that would be to implement, but if it could be done, we could all stay on the same server without griping constantly at each other. Except for you guys who want one server that is FFA pvp right now but who don't want a separate server to accomodate your needs. I think you guys really do just want victims to slaughter.

[beauhindman]

Remember, comparing this indie game to another successful indie game (Darkfall) is not a bad thing. Whether you like the style or not, DF is doing just fine. They sit comfortably with their, what, 2 servers, and continue to develop and create new content.

In other words, saying that going completely FFA PVP would be a death knell on this game might or might NOT be true.

Beau

[KeithStone]

It's only a few days in to a ruleset that is supposed to last at least six months, and many of you are already riled up and trying to get the timetable altered so you can kill anyone, anywhere. So maybe you need to go start a poll regarding the creation of an FFA server separate from the one we're all on now. Don't have a vote 'no' option if you can help it, just have people who want the FFA server ASAP vote 'yes' and everyone else can keep their opinions to themselves. If you can't do that with the poll feature, show up in the thread and vote by post. That would at least give the devs an idea what percentage of the population wants another server with a different ruleset.

Or maybe there would be a way to open up a free for all patch of land on the current server for you all to start out on, with the same resources as the original. I have no idea how difficult that would be to implement, but if it could be done, we could all stay on the same server without griping constantly at each other. Except for you guys who want one server that is FFA pvp right now but who don't want a separate server to accomodate your needs. I think you guys really do just want victims to slaughter.

I'm seriously not trying to change the game- just trying to releive some of the confusion about what the game is going to be after prelude.

[Jadzia]

The main problem is that no one knows what the game is going to be after Prelude. We can only guess.

[ifireallymust]

The main problem is that no one knows what the game is going to be after Prelude. We can only guess.

Nor do we even know what we'll want as players in six months. The carebear crowd (of which I am a member in case you couldn't tell) might be tired of building up and ready to do some knocking down by then. Or at least be ready to group up and take on support roles/send out attack chipmunks/refortify during battles/form a vigilante group and hunt down every griefer in the game until they're all too scared to log in.

[eightonefive]

if this game splits to a carebear server and a pvp server I will leave. ffa pvp sandbox means that. let us decide how the world shapes and the politics that govern it. if you are worried about dying and losing some tools,
a. form an alliance with other tribes for protection,
b. pay for protection from one of the various merc tribes that are forming,
c. join a larger tribe,
or
d. dont play

but dont come to this game knowing that it was intended to be ffa pvp and tribal wars and then complain because "someone is going to force me to play the way the game was intended"
seriously, how boring is it going to be sitting in one area and building tents all day? once you have crafted everything and have reached the top eschelon of crafters are you just going to keep tailoring more hats? when your junk piles are depleted within your territory are you just going to stop crafting for fear of leaving your safe zone?

[ifireallymust]

if this game splits to a carebear server and a pvp server I will leave. ffa pvp sandbox means that. let us decide how the world shapes and the politics that govern it. if you are worried about dying and losing some tools,
a. form an alliance with other tribes for protection,
b. pay for protection from one of the various merc tribes that are forming,
c. join a larger tribe,
or
d. dont play

but dont come to this game knowing that it was intended to be ffa pvp and tribal wars and then complain because "someone is going to force me to play the way the game was intended"
seriously, how boring is it going to be sitting in one area and building tents all day? once you have crafted everything and have reached the top eschelon of crafters are you just going to keep tailoring more hats? when your junk piles are depleted within your territory are you just going to stop crafting for fear of leaving your safe zone?

I came to this game expecting to have at least six months before I would need to decide whether to join a tribe, pay mercenaries, form an alliance, get bored of crafting, figure out how to replace what I lose due to more frequent pvp encounters, or quit. And guess what? I'm not the one trying to change the timetable. Are you?

[Franconian]

Nothin like fear to herd the masses .

[JCatano]

As you see its not decided yet. Yes, I think it won't be FFA. Thats my opinion, you don't have to agree. I'm willing to bet though :P

It can be mutual agreement, or flagged for war. If you want to siege others, you have to be vulnerable against sieges too. But as far as things goes now the most likely solution will be 2 different servers...which is sad IMO.

The safety of tribal zones are going to be removed per past posts from Jooky and a very recent one from Virtus on the mmorpg.com forums. With that being said, I have no idea how you are under the impression that the game won't generally be FFA. Just because they said it's not going to be a gankfest does not mean it won't be open-PvP. It simply means their plans include consequences. Some of you people need to start separating your definition of "gank" from open-PvP/FFA.

Also, not knowing how sieges are going to work at the moment have nothing to do with open-PvP versus safe zones. It has everything to do with how the sieges will work mechanic-wise... (Need to declare a takeover, then a siege window opens? Towns open to be sieged without war declaration? Costs to siege? Etc., etc.) We already know structure destruction at any time is in. He answered Keith's question about that.

And... Mutual agreement and/or flagged wars are not open-PvP. Remember, I'll say it again... This game has open-PvP. I've never typed "open-PvP" so many times before. Will Jordi change his mind? Couldn't tell ya. If he does, his bait and switch worked. ;)

My suggestion would be to ask for a PvE server. You've wanted one from the very beginning, anyway, and he said it may happen if there is enough interest.

[ifireallymust]

The safety of tribal zones are going to be removed per past posts from Jooky and a very recent one from Virtus on the mmorpg.com forums. With that being said, I have no idea how you are under the impression that the game won't generally be FFA. Just because they said it's not going to be a gankfest does not mean it won't be open-PvP. It simply means their plans include consequences. Some of you people need to start separating your definition of "gank" from open-PvP/FFA.

Also, not knowing how sieges are going to work at the moment have nothing to do with open-PvP versus safe zones. It has everything to do with how the sieges will work mechanic-wise... (Need to declare a takeover, then a siege window opens? Towns open to be sieged without war declaration? Costs to siege? Etc., etc.) We already know structure destruction at any time is in. He answered Keith's question about that.

And... Mutual agreement and/or flagged wars are not open-PvP. Remember, I'll say it again... This game has open-PvP. I've never typed "open-PvP" so many times before. Will Jordi change his mind? Couldn't tell ya. If he does, his bait and switch worked. ;)

My suggestion would be to ask for a PvE server. You've wanted one from the very beginning, anyway, and he said it may happen if there is enough interest.

I'm all for a server with different pvp rulesets, although I don't mind pvp outside my one, tiny little patch of land. So pure pve wouldn't be my thing either. So, if we're going by what has been promised by the game's creator and its developers, sometime after six months has passed, my little safe zone is going to go poof. And if my safe zone is permanent or if my safe zone goes away before 6 months has passed...how did you put this...his bait and switch worked?

[Jadzia]

The safety of tribal zones are going to be removed per past posts from Jooky and a very recent one from Virtus on the mmorpg.com forums. With that being said, I have no idea how you are under the impression that the game won't generally be FFA. Just because they said it's not going to be a gankfest does not mean it won't be open-PvP. It simply means their plans include consequences. Some of you people need to start separating your definition of "gank" from open-PvP/FFA.

Also, not knowing how sieges are going to work at the moment have nothing to do with open-PvP versus safe zones. It has everything to do with how the sieges will work mechanic-wise... (Need to declare a takeover, then a siege window opens? Towns open to be sieged without war declaration? Costs to siege? Etc., etc.) We already know structure destruction at any time is in. He answered Keith's question about that.

And... Mutual agreement and/or flagged wars are not open-PvP. Remember, I'll say it again... This game has open-PvP. I've never typed "open-PvP" so many times before. Will Jordi change his mind? Couldn't tell ya. If he does, his bait and switch worked. ;)

My suggestion would be to ask for a PvE server. You've wanted one from the very beginning, anyway, and he said it may happen if there is enough interest.
You are losing focus again. I didn't talk about the game not being open PvP...I said the sieges won't work like that. The game has open PvP, but it has nothing to do with the siege conditions, sieges can use the 'flagged for war' mechanic. Again, I'm not talking about the safe zones. I'm talking about under what conditions can we attack-destroy other tribe villages after Prelude.

I've never asked for a PvE server. I always asked for one with safe zones-PvP zones.

I'm not expecting an answer from you. We have been here before and never got anywhere, lol.

[JCatano]

You are losing focus again. I didn't talk about the game not being open PvP...I said the sieges won't work like that. The game has open PvP, but it has nothing to do with the siege conditions, sieges can use the 'flagged for war' mechanic. Again, I'm not talking about the safe zones. I'm talking about under what conditions can we attack-destroy other tribe villages after Prelude.

I've never asked for a PvE server. I always asked for one with safe zones-PvP zones.

I'm not expecting an answer from you. We have been here before and never got anywhere, lol.

Lose focus...? lol...

Actually, you did ask about a PvE server before. You even quoted Jordi's answer in your reply to me in one of those long PvP threads. No idea why you'd ask about one if you weren't interested in joining it.

Anyway, with the new answer from Virtus, the bait and switch is complete. ;)

And, Jordi obviously has no clue:

I just read in a post that I cannot find, anymore, that he was going to give an option for a War/Chaos server... That isn't what we were asking for at all... o.O

[Tandarie]

You guys can talk till you are blue in the face about FFA PVP and in the end if people threaten to leave there will HAVE to be some safe areas. Period. example


Only 10 men can make a tribe.. oh wait .. you guys are pissed?? Ok 1 person can make a tribe... oh wait now the tribes are pissed?? ok so 1 person can make a homestead and 5 people can make a tribe...


Sound familiar??? When you dipshits get it through your head that things will probably change in the course of the game then you can finally shut the hell up and enjoy it.

[Tom316]

You guys can talk till you are blue in the face about FFA PVP and in the end if people threaten to leave there will HAVE to be some safe areas. Period. example


Only 10 men can make a tribe.. oh wait .. you guys are pissed?? Ok 1 person can make a tribe... oh wait now the tribes are pissed?? ok so 1 person can make a homestead and 5 people can make a tribe...


Sound familiar??? When you dipshits get it through your head that things will probably change in the course of the game then you can finally shut the hell up and enjoy it.

Just to clear something up. The 1 person making a tribe was never intended and was only done for testing at the time. At no point EVER was it intended for 1 person to make a tribe. Homesteads was already planned to take care of that and it just took some time to get them ingame.

As far as the 10 people reduced to 5 it was purely based upon statics recovered from beta testing. It was seen that there was byfar more 5 person tribes then larger tribes so that is why it was reduced to that number.

Will things change? Yes, I am sure things are going to be revised and improved upon. But I'm fairly certain that the optional pvp zones is something thats not going to change.