Did you know this will be a FFA PVP game?

[KeithStone]

Just curious.

[JCatano]

WTF! I'm quitting!

[Raye]

Well since this information was available before you preordered, why did you preorder and now act all fed up about it?
Also i bet nothing is truly set in stone, i have full confidence in the developers that they will make this game enjoyable for all different playstyles.
I bet it will have something to do with the "good" "evil" "neutral" alignments. Only time will tell.

[Jadzia]

After prelude this will be a FFA PVP game.

it's not what I'm asking for it's what has already been stated.

After making this thread, I've noticed that most of you think that safe zones are a perma thing.

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3805-False-Sense-of-Security-With-Prelude

You are wrong. It has never been stated like this. It was stated that safe zones will be gone after Prelude but we will get defensive structures, walls, lockable gates and perhaps even NPC guards to give us protection. Seems you see only half of the whole picture.

Tribe siege mechanics has never ever been announced. We don't know what can we fight later and with what conditions.

[KeithStone]

You are wrong. It has never been stated like this. It was stated that safe zones will be gone after Prelude but we will get defensive structures, walls, lockable gates and perhaps even NPC guards to give us protection. Seems you see only half of the whole picture.

This doesn't give you a safe zone, it just helps you to protect from raiders.

When I say no safe zones, i'm talking about the ability to attack anywhere, even inside your tribe territory if the pk's manage to get inside and get past your defenses.

[JCatano]

Well since this information was available before you preordered, why did you preorder and now act all fed up about it?
Also i bet nothing is truly set in stone, i have full confidence in the developers that they will make this game enjoyable for all different playstyles.
I bet it will have something to do with the "good" "evil" "neutral" alignments. Only time will tell.

If you were replying to me...

I was kidding.

[Raye]

This doesn't give you a safe zone, it just helps you to protect from raiders.

When I say no safe zones, i'm talking about the ability to attack anywhere, even inside your tribe territory if the pk's manage to get inside and get past your defenses.

Then you will just make sure you have enough defenses to keep yourself safe. This might be the wrong game for you, but you shouldve realised that before you preordered. Im not trying to be rude or anything, just saying this game is alot about survival. But you should stay around for a while after the real launch to see how it all actually works out. I bet the griefers will play a very insignificant role in this game.


If you were replying to me...

I was kidding.

I was replying the OP.

[JCatano]

Raye -

Keith likes open-PvP. He isn't complaining about it.

[KeithStone]

Then you will just make sure you have enough defenses to keep yourself safe. This might be the wrong game for you, but you shouldve realised that before you preordered. Im not trying to be rude or anything, just saying this game is alot about survival. But you should stay around for a while after the real launch to see how it all actually works out. I bet the griefers will play a very insignificant role in this game.

I was replying the OP.
See what JCatano said, right below your post.

[Chavoda]

KeithStone

Nearly everyone knows that save zones will be gone, tho who don't are told in game within their first hour as they make a silly comment about pvp..

Be careful not to state rumors as facts either. theres a lot of info scattered around and a lot of rumors also. wait and see is the best way to go about it.

the only facts and they can chance at any time are from and by Xsyon (http://www.xsyon.com/forum/member.php/5-Xsyon)

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

[Raye]

See what JCatano said, right below your post.

Yes i know, but my posts is pointed towards those who seem to be fed up with safe zones being removed. Im sure the devs will figure out a way to please most people. :)

[JCatano]

WTF! I'm quitting, again!

[dlld]

I don't really care about safezones that much I just don't want a game where almost everyone and their mom is a "Red" lunatic who (tries to) kill every person that comes within view distance. There's already 2 games out in that department.

[KeithStone]

KeithStone

Nearly everyone knows that save zones will be gone, tho who don't are told in game within their first hour as they make a silly comment about pvp..

Be careful not to state rumors as facts either. theres a lot of info scattered around and a lot of rumors also. wait and see is the best way to go about it.

the only facts and they can chance at any time are from and by Xsyon (http://www.xsyon.com/forum/member.php/5-Xsyon)

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.

I started this thread because of the one I linked in my first post- most people in the other thread didn't realize that prelude safe zones are only for prelude.

to your Edit: 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.

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.

[Raye]

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.

Exactly this, he will not implement something that has not worked for other games. It will not be a big gankfeast. He will figure out a way that works and that is exactly what the FAQ is saying.

[KeithStone]

Exactly this, he will not implement something that has not worked for other games. It will not be a big gankfeast. He will figure out a way that works and that is exactly what the FAQ is saying.

raiding = raiding

there's not much to it- you raid a city for what they have and to kill the people who are there.

My point though with this poll, is did you or did you not know this would happen.

From my other thread, most people did not know.

[Chavoda]

My apologies KeithStone , I as under the impression you were member of the Ultra PvP fraction and adding more rumors to the mill. You are not and defended yourself whit Honor, I shall let you raid my home free for one hour in prelude *nod*

[FabricSoftener]

raiding = raiding

there's not much to it- you raid a city for what they have and to kill the people who are there.

My point though with this poll, is did you or did you not know this would happen.

From my other thread, most people did not know.

oh for crying out loud why do you think people build fences and moats? yes I knew and all I had to do to figure it out was watch a few of the intro videos the community has made.

[KeithStone]

oh for crying out loud why do you think people build fences and moats? yes I knew and all I had to do to figure it out was watch a few of the intro videos the community has made.

again, I made this for the people that don't know- just because you know it doesn't mean other people don't.

read my last sentence: From my other thread, most people did not know. http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3805-False-Sense-of-Security-With-Prelude

I'm not trying to annoy you- just trying to help those that didn't already know.

I'm for the community not against it.

[rixk]

raiding = raiding

there's not much to it- you raid a city for what they have and to kill the people who are there.

My point though with this poll, is did you or did you not know this would happen.

From my other thread, most people did not know.

Pretty sure, that everyone who has bought the game knows about FFA-PVP. You don't also seem to understand, that creating safezones doesn't mean, that invulnerability will have to continue.
For example. Every sane tribe will create walls around each settlement.. Now when only way to cross the wall means, that you have to craft expensive siege weapon, drag it behind you for an hour or so to the desired settlement, then mindless "raiding" won't happen too often, don't you think? Which in result means, that the zone inside the walls is pretty safe even when people inside technically would be vulnerable to any attack.
This is just one example.. there are tons of ways to keep some area safe, but still vulnerable to attack.

[angus858]

I knew it was advertised as a FFA PvP game. I also know that Notorious Games is a business.

A few months from now the devs just might remove safe zones. First they will have to make a business decision. Can they afford to lose half of their revenue? You know the answer to that already. If the devs can devise an alternate way to allow the carebears to continue enjoying Xsyon without safezones then they might replace safezones with the new mechanic. Whatever that mechanic is it must prevent PK'ers from killing newbs and crafters who want to avoid pvp.

We can debate endlessly what we think the world of Xyson should be, and what the devs wanted it to be. Ultimately it is economics that will decide. One man's virtual world is another man's paycheck. That's just the reality of it.

[BigCountry]

You cannot remove safe zones in time. Then all you get is a WAVE of new PvP'ers coming into your game only for PvP....this would totally unbalance the game. They #1 would not understand the game, and #2 would make life total hell for the PvE players who do not want to partake.

I think the best thing to do, after the wipe, is launch with 2 servers - 1 FFA open PvP (no safe zones), and 1 PvE server (no PvP at all, this is a pure role-play/PvE server).

I think after the hell we suffered thru this weekend, everyone should have no problem with 2 servers.
:D

[KeithStone]

Pretty sure, that everyone who has bought the game knows about FFA-PVP. You don't also seem to understand, that creating safezones doesn't mean, that invulnerability will have to continue.
For example. Every sane tribe will create walls around each settlement.. Now when only way to cross the wall means, that you have to craft expensive siege weapon, drag it behind you for an hour or so to the desired settlement, then mindless "raiding" won't happen too often, don't you think? Which in result means, that the zone inside the walls is pretty safe even when people inside technically would be vulnerable to any attack.
This is just one example.. there are tons of ways to keep some area safe, but still vulnerable to attack.

My point is there won't be a code in the game that doesn't allow it to happen at all.

No safe zones means just that- you are not safe because because of whatever the person has to do - if they get through your defenses you still have to fight with them or die.

The way it is now- you can ignore them because they can't do any damage to you, because it's coded that way.

[Larsa]

After prelude this will be a FFA PVP game. ... Why "after" prelude, it is FFA PvP with (partial) loot right now.

[KeithStone]

Why "after" prelude, it is FFA PvP with (partial) loot right now.

right now it's limited to non tribal lands.

after prelude it will be open in tribal lands.

[Larsa]

right now it's limited to non tribal lands.

after prelude it will be open in tribal lands.

It still is FFA PvP right now, it's only that every player has a (compared to land mass) tiny safe zone. Each time someone leaves his safe zone he can be killed without implications and repercussions.

[KeithStone]

It still is FFA PvP right now, it's only that every player has a (compared to land mass) tiny safe zone. Each time someone leaves his safe zone he can be killed without implications and repercussions.

are you just trying to argue?

I told you it's limited ffa pvp, the point of this thread is that after prelude it won't be limted to non-tribal lands.

The title of the poll is: "Safe zones are going away after prelude" typo corrected

my post has nothing to do with pvp outside tribal lands during prelude.

[Larsa]

are you just trying to argue?

I told you it's limited ffa pvp, the point of this thread is that after prelude it won't be limted to non-tribal lands.

The title of the poll is: "Safe zones are going away after prelude" typo corrected

my post has nothing to do with pvp outside tribal lands during prelude.You seem to be bad at reading. This thread is titled "Did you know this will be a FFA PVP game?". I told you that it already is a FFA PvP game, it just has some safe zones. That's practically the same setup like any other FFA PvP game out there.

[Doc]

Yah, game is already FFA PvP, so the question is actually very silly. Its like saying Lineage 2 or EvE are not FFA PvP. Or, well, any other game with FFA PvP.

Another of "those" polls.

[KeithStone]

You seem to be bad at reading. This thread is titled "Did you know this will be a FFA PVP game?". I told you that it already is a FFA PvP game, it just has some safe zones. That's practically the same setup like any other FFA PvP game out there.

The question is clearly stated in the poll. If you choose to ignore that- then so be it.

this game will not have safe zones after prelude and is the point of the poll.

[Doc]

The question is clearly stated in the poll. If you choose to ignore that- then so be it.

this game will not have safe zones after prelude and is the point of the poll.

Safe zoes have nothing to do with game being FFA PvP. You fail to grasp this.

[KeithStone]

Safe zoes have nothing to do with game being FFA PvP. You fail to grasp this.

you guys argue it all you want, bu tthe question for the poll is about safe zones.

i did give the title of the thread a misleading title- and wasn't my intentions- but i clearly stated my question in the poll.

[Doc]

you guys argue it all you want, bu tthe question for the poll is about safe zones.

i did give the title of the thread a misleading title- and wasn't my intentions- but i clearly stated my question in the poll.

Yah, just a bit msleadin, thread title say 1 thing, actual poll something else, your post something different from either.

Thats one skewed poll if you ask me :)

[ifireallymust]

Did you know the devs are giving themselves at least six months to decide how they want to expand the areas of pvp/increase the chance of pvp/increase the frequency of pvp/change whatever they want to change about pvp? Did you know the devs are giving us all at least six months to build, craft, stalk and kill game outside our safe zones, stalk and kill other players outside their safe zones, and vice versa?

I think you do know that, and so do a lot of others who are accusing everyone else of being ignorant about post-prelude play.

And I also think a lot of those doing the accusing are really saying, "We don't like the current ruleset, change it for us now so we can kill other players more easily, in more locations, more often! Oh, and don't listen to the carebears, because they have no idea what horrible fate is in store for them in six months!" For those who only create these threads and post in them because you want something to change, why not just be honest about it and say it's because it's what YOU want?

[BigCountry]

Did you know the devs are giving themselves at least six months to decide how they want to expand the areas of pvp/increase the chance of pvp/increase the frequency of pvp/change whatever they want to change about pvp? Did you know the devs are giving us all at least six months to build, craft, stalk and kill game outside our safe zones, stalk and kill other players outside their safe zones, and vice versa?

I think you do know that, and so do a lot of others who are accusing everyone else of being ignorant about post-prelude play.

And I also think a lot of those doing the accusing are really saying, "We don't like the current ruleset, change it for us now so we can kill other players more easily, in more locations, more often! Oh, and don't listen to the carebears, because they have no idea what horrible fate is in store for them in six months!" For those who only create these threads and post in them because you want something to change, why not just be honest about it and say it's because it's what YOU want?

I do not think anyone is complaining about the current ruleset. I think most of us who power game realize we will burn though this content in 1 month. If there is nothing to fight over (outside of random PKn), this game will not last 6 months for a majority of us (we will all just be sitting there looking at each other bored to death). 6 months is an eternity to a virtual word.

You cannot wait 6 months, then turn a PvE constructed realm into a PvP constructed realm over night. That just will not work.

I think that is all we are saying. 6 months should be 2-4 weeks. Or do this, all formed tribes have 2 weeks safe zone protection (from the day they are formed), then it's turned off.
:D

[ifireallymust]

I do not think anyone is complaining about the current ruleset. I think most of us who power game realize we will burn though this content in 1 month. If there is nothing to fight over (outside of random PKn), this game will not last 6 months for a majority of us.

I think that is all we are saying.

We will all just be sitting there looking at each other bored to death.

You could be right, and even though I solo, I could still be right up there with the power gaming crowd through the sheer amount of time I play. I know I was hallucinating from sleep deprivation earlier, because I found a circular saw blade, and those don't actually exist, they're just a rumor of a legend of a myth.

It hasn't been a month yet. Why do I get the feeling from reading these posts and from global chat in game that a certain segment of the population wants an unlimited killing spree as soon as the server is back up from the second wipe?

[rznkain]

It really does not matter what they posted a year ago as someone else said plans change and when you have a player base over 75% in another poll who want there to remain safe zones with options you can surely guess what the devs will do.I would be willing to bet you come 6 months from now there will not be the kinda chaos your wanting you can wish it all you want but they wanna make money and they want a player base the 25% full chaos pvp crowd won't get there way no matter how much you wish it just won't happen. I agree with another poster just have 2 servers and it will stop alot of this from the get go but ofc pvpers won't like that because 90% of you want easy kills and to grief ppl who really want nothing to do with the pvp aspect if they put you all on a server without the non pvpers you would hate it.

[jokhul]

<snip>
It hasn't been a month yet. Why do I get the feeling from reading these posts and from global chat in game that a certain segment of the population wants an unlimited killing spree as soon as the server is back up from the second wipe?

Because nothing frustrates a wannabe PK'er more than watching a bunch of "carebears" frolicking inside a safe zone... :D

Besides, how is an honest PK'er supposed to play this game if he cannot farm carebears for armor, weapons and food ?

I suspect the agenda of this poll will become apparent later: "Dev's, look ! The majority of the playerbase KNOWS this is a FFA-PVP game ! They accept it and are happy with it ! So it's OK to remove the safe zones NAO !!1!1!!"

[ifireallymust]

Because nothing frustrates a wannabe PK'er more than watching a bunch of "carebears" frolicking inside a safe zone... :D

Besides, how is an honest PK'er supposed to play this game if he cannot farm carebears for armor, weapons and food ?

I suspect the agenda of this poll will become apparent later: "Dev's, look ! The majority of the playerbase KNOWS this is a FFA-PVP game ! They accept it and are happy with it ! So it's OK to remove the safe zones NAO !!1!1!!"

Pretty sure the devs are a little brighter about manipulation attempts than that. And at least one of this morning's (afternoon's?) thread starters seems to want two servers, and wants to be on the one with the harsher pvp ruleset, which means no frollicking carebears for him to rob. And I know I wouldn't cry if the world outside my tribal area became safer due to a mass exodus of some of our more persistent pkers.

[Larsa]

... And at least one of this morning's (afternoon's?) thread starters seems to want two servers, and wants to be on the one with the harsher pvp ruleset, which means no frollicking carebears for him to rob. ...Ah, PvPers always say that. They always say that they want real risk, skilled PvP, excitement, honest competition and all that jazz. But practically are they just killing newbies and gatherers all day long. :)

[ifireallymust]

Ah, PvPers always say that. They always say that they want real risk, skilled PvP, excitement, honest competition and all that jazz. But practically are they just killing newbies and gatherers all day long. :)

Then I guess they won't make a thread demanding their own server with harsher pvp rules, will they? They'll just keep trying to change the rules on this server.

Hm. Now that you mention it, where is that simple poll? I guess I'll go make it!

[Doc]

The majority of the playerbase KNOWS this is a FFA-PVP game !

umm, no, thats not actually what the poll is about, thats what misleading thread name is about ;P

[BigCountry]

Yeah, most of the players do not know this will be a FFA PvP game. That's why waiting 6 months, and then dumping that on them, is a really bad idea. For both the people that do, and the people that don't for that matter. It's why we started so many threads on the topic this morning. Let them know as soon as possible and implement it as soon as possible, so they can group up, form alliances, and adjust. And most importantly the world will construct as it should.

1.) devs set up rules, players react, socialize and build a world around those rules
2.) devs change rules months into = very very bad experience for all of us

lol

:D

[yoori]

Big C I think most of the community knows it'll be FFA. At least it was that way until big wave of new players lately. And that's when posts on removing safezones started to show up.

That would mean that new players are the PvP players that doesn't understand progress of this game. We're just waiting to get quality PvP, not FFA bloodbath where we don't have a safe place where we can defend ourselves. If we had defences to secure our tribal lands there wouldn't be need for safezones.

[BigCountry]

Yoori I did not sense that over the weekend. I saw a lot of people trying to solo the game. That's not going to work. It's not the way the game was intended/designed to play. I do realize it was laggy as heck, so maybe my observations were based on that being the only thing a lot of players could do.

Just out of curiosity, how are you planning on defending yourself 6 months from now?

[byrgar]

Yoori I did not sense that over the weekend. I saw a lot of people trying to solo the game. That's not going to work. It's not the way the game was intended/designed to play. I do realize it was laggy as heck, so maybe my observations were based on that being the only thing a lot of players could do.

Just out of curiosity, how are you planning on defending yourself 6 months from now?

Wait a minute, you say some people tried to play the game in a way other than was intended, and that it wont work, so you are implying it is a bad thing to do so, yet here you are, in another thread that is trying to get the game changed from the way it is intended/designed to be played.

oh the irony

[yoori]

Yeah, going solo isn't a good idea and I don;t know how people are seeing this.
'I have no idea to be honest, all we know is that we'll get gates so wall and gates for sure, we have a lot of plans, but I won't say what they are :P.

We'll have to wait and see what Jooky gives us to play with.

[BigCountry]

Cool. We are focusing on gates and walls as well.
:D

[ifireallymust]

And it's back to being all about the solo players and the small tribes vs the big tribes again. So once you big tribes all have your walls and your gates, it's Prelude over, let the killing of the solo players and the small tribes begin? How nice for you, you'll have all our stuff. I'm sure you'll also have a great deal of fun, at least until you've driven everyone who doesn't play your chosen style out of the game and you are all bored of making up reasons to attack the people you were allied with during your takeover phase. Hooray for the political zerg, we win, time to go play something else now? That's some future you have in mind.

I'm not saying it's not realistic. That's exactly how it really is. It's just not any fun, and it renders all systems of good, evil, and neutral utterly meaningless. Plus, it won't take you more than a month after Prelude to accomplish.

[coca]

Big C I think blah blah it was that way until big wave of new players lately. blah blah blah That would mean that new players are the PvP players that doesn't understand progress of this game. We're just waiting to get quality PvP, not FFA bloodbath blah blah.

That would be me.. I am one of those "new players" I am a PK.

I have logged into this game looking to get "quality PvP" unfortunatly for you sir... it will lead to a bloodbath.

[Virtus]

Hey guys, sorry for not clearing this up earlier. I only just saw it a little while ago and had to confirm what I thought was going to happen.

Here is the plan:

At first all tribal areas will be safe then, at some point down the road, tribal safe zones will be optional.

If your tribe wishes to play more realistically with the chance of being attacked at any point you may do so. However, if you wish to be more of a crafting tribe and not have to look over your shoulder all the time you may keep the safe zone on.

Hope this clears things up.

[BigCountry]

Hey guys, sorry for not clearing this up earlier. I only just saw it a little while ago and had to confirm what I thought was going to happen.

Here is the plan:

At first all tribal areas will be safe then, at some point down the road, tribal safe zones will be optional.

If your tribe wishes to play more realistically with the chance of being attacked at any point you may do so. However, if you wish to be more of a crafting tribe and not have to look over your shoulder all the time you may keep the safe zone on.

Hope this clears things up.

?!!? We will definitely need a different ruleset then. This changes everything for a lot of us. Why in the world would I want to open my territory to PvP if other people have the option not too? That's not sandbox, that's World of Warcraft....
:(

Xsyon told us they were getting turned off.

Wow....

[ifireallymust]

Hey guys, sorry for not clearing this up earlier. I only just saw it a little while ago and had to confirm what I thought was going to happen.

Here is the plan:

At first all tribal areas will be safe then, at some point down the road, tribal safe zones will be optional.

If your tribe wishes to play more realistically with the chance of being attacked at any point you may do so. However, if you wish to be more of a crafting tribe and not have to look over your shoulder all the time you may keep the safe zone on.

Hope this clears things up.

But...but...I was just going to come up with a brilliant way to hide up in some mountain cave with no home and only a crafter's knife and a hungry bear, carving out a trade empire for myself against all odds, ducking and dodging pkers at every turn, with a rock for my pillow and a bandana tied around my head and a...

Oh well, back to being serious, thank you for letting us know!

[sionide]

Hey guys, sorry for not clearing this up earlier. I only just saw it a little while ago and had to confirm what I thought was going to happen.

Here is the plan:

At first all tribal areas will be safe then, at some point down the road, tribal safe zones will be optional.

If your tribe wishes to play more realistically with the chance of being attacked at any point you may do so. However, if you wish to be more of a crafting tribe and not have to look over your shoulder all the time you may keep the safe zone on.

Hope this clears things up.


It's a far way off, but I hope it will change to a more FFA style.

Instead of a black and white, I purpose a system like:


Tribe A declares war on Tribe B

1) Tribe B accepts = total war (building destruction, everything)
2) Tribe B doesn't accept = just player killing and looting anywhere/anytime no building destruction

That way for option 2, they can hide in their little citadel (a la Eve stations in Empire), and Tribe A can "siege" their territory. Eventually, Tribe B will have to submit to Tribe A to continue playing. Hence, some soft of tribute system would then be created or a vassalization (made up word?).

Again, we have a lot of time to sort this stuff out before it happens.

[byrgar]

That's not sandbox, that's World of Warcraft....

Actually, being able to do what you want when you want IS sandbox, and deciding to turn on or off your safezone is being able to play how you want

[Atmos]

But...but...I was just going to come up with a brilliant way to hide up in some mountain cave with no home and only a crafter's knife and a hungry bear, carving out a trade empire for myself against all odds, ducking and dodging pkers at every turn, with a rock for my pillow and a bandana tied around my head and a...

Oh well, back to being serious, thank you for letting us know!

Bring me 100 sand and I'll give you the coordinates to my mountain cave. pictured below.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b251/Nielic/Xsyon/Screenshot_2011221_6_35_1-1.jpg

[BigCountry]

Again, we have a lot of time to sort this stuff out before it happens.

No offense to anyone, but I would like it sorted out now please. I need to know what the end game repesents here, or to be quite honest, what's the point in playing the "game" to being with. Guilds need to know what sort of end game group vs group is offering in this game. We are not here to play the sims online. Everything we were led to be believe failed with what Virtus just announced.

[Jadzia]

Hey guys, sorry for not clearing this up earlier. I only just saw it a little while ago and had to confirm what I thought was going to happen.

Here is the plan:

At first all tribal areas will be safe then, at some point down the road, tribal safe zones will be optional.

If your tribe wishes to play more realistically with the chance of being attacked at any point you may do so. However, if you wish to be more of a crafting tribe and not have to look over your shoulder all the time you may keep the safe zone on.

Hope this clears things up.

Thank you for clearing it up.

[ifireallymust]

Bring me 100 sand and I'll give you the coordinates to my mountain cave. pictured below.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b251/Nielic/Xsyon/Screenshot_2011221_6_35_1-1.jpg

Oh you clever fiend! You photo shopped the coords out. No, you keep your cave, but that looks like the place to live, and now I will keep a lookout for handy caves just in case I ever need one. I better finish skilling crafting (after the upcoming wipe of course) because I'm betting there's no junk piles hanging out in empty caves. Bears, maybe, but not junkpiles. Where is that guy who wanted to be a Shaman? He needs a cave, too. And a bear companion.

[Atmos]

No junk piles or water. Lots of wood, basalt, granite, twigs and grass. Trust me that cave goes pretty far back, a couple of barricades would make that thing pretty much impenetrable until siege warfare and even then it would be pretty easy to defend.

ps. to the dev that made this cave: nice. real nice.

[Dubanka]

*shrug*

sheep will be sheep.
wolves will be wolves.

so long as you've got to have yours off to attack mine...i mean if you can attack mine without risk, that's bs.

also it would be a lot simpler if 'safe' areas were relegated to certain points on the map...so you couldn't block key resources via a well positioned and invulnerable stronghold.

[Virtus]

As the game grows there will be good tribes that do want to open their lands for that more realistic experience. I have a feeling the regulators will be one of these tribes :)

[sionide]

No offense to anyone, but I would like it sorted out now please. I need to know what the end game repesents here, or to be quite honest, what's the point in playing the "game" to being with. Guilds need to know what sort of end game group vs group is offering in this game. We are not here to play the sims online. Everything we were led to be believe failed with what Virtus just announced.

I understand your concerns, but I guess you just have to trust the devs. That's really what it comes down to.

It's a sandbox game that already has FFA (outside tribal zones) with full looting. That in itself should give you confidence of what type of game the devs are making and their mindset.

I think they want to take their time and make the system "right." And not just rush in, make rash decisions of this is how it's going to be, and then bonk the whole system when 4 months later people will scream at them saying, "Yeah, but you said this and this 4 months ago."

If that isn't enough for you, then not sure what to tell you, I guess "smell you later."

[bruisie159]

yeah it all looks good to me now... I mean come on does it have be totally black or white!? Havent u guys heard of compromise so we can ALL enjoy the game?? That is aimed at both sides of the argument not to mention any names but pvpers and "carebears".

The announcment about pvp plans is great, its a COMPROMISE! The pvpers already have concessions in a game thats not supposed to be pvp focused, namely.. FULL LOOT - FFA outside of tribe zones. Tribal Warfare. And..the possibility later on of haviong secondary settlements in new area that are fully open to raiding. AND plenty of tribes giving up there safe zone to play a game of pew pew with you!

The carebears get... a limited area that is relatively safe to craft and supply the world with goods. Is that so bad??

It seems to be if thats not enough for you then maybe you really are just looking for easy target non pvp types to gank as apparently some people already have doing camping spawn points.

Anyway, try to understand other peoples point of view ffs and learn to COMPROMISE then we can all enjoy a great game!

[Vandali]

Some people just aren't happy unless they can destroy another's bucket and spade.

[coca]

Even the Lux Arcana in darkfall would think that it is a bad idea to have "safe zones"

Why not give a tribe some defence mechanisims to make it harder for attackers to be successfull in those areas.. but to give land owners invulnerability is dumb.
It will encourage people to sit in their city and do nothing.. people will get bored and quit the game.

One of the HUGE problems darkfall had in the begining is there was no benifit to leaving your city one you made one. People didn't leave becuase they were scared they might loose their pixels... people got burned out and bored.


I would almost agree with some sort of risk/reward scenereo for tribes... Have a few "safe" locastions that had crap resources around it.... you could sit in your safe area but wouldn't get much accomplished or you could go out to riskier places further away from safe areas and your avaialble resources would increase and be higher quality.

[MrKrueak]

Even the Lux Arcana in darkfall would think that it is a bad idea to have "safe zones"

.

and yet people wonder why Darkfall failed as an mmo, ever wonder why all pure pvp oriented mmo's fail?????

there has to be a compromise, eve online to me is the only mmo that has truly pulled this compromise off.

[Doc]

I would almost agree with some sort of risk/reward scenereo for tribes... Have a few "safe" locastions that had crap resources around it.... you could sit in your safe area but wouldn't get much accomplished or you could go out to riskier places further away from safe areas and your avaialble resources would increase and be higher quality.

I looked into my crystal ball and i see that this would be general idea for further depvelopment.

I dont really know what line of thought gets people to conclude some things:

We have initial land area, where we build towns. After a while, resources will be deleted if you happen to sit on one, new lands with new resources will open that will be ripe for warfare, and someone concludes everyone will just sit in theor town doing nothing. Give devs some credit, jeebus, FFA PvP is ingame, future stuff will involve PvP, if it bugs you sooooo much that you cant claim tiny piece of land with town in it that does nothing but looks pretty...i guess this is not game for you.

[BigCountry]

and yet people wonder why Darkfall failed as an mmo

Darkfall never failed. Behind Shadowbane and EvE it is the #3 mmorpg far as open pvp during this decade. Darkfall is very much alive and kicking, it just lacks in created sandbox content - everything you fight over is static.

[Doc]

Darkfall never failed. Behind Shadowbane and EvE it is the #3 mmorpg far as open pvp during this decade. Darkfall is very much alive and kicking, it just lacks in created sandbox content - everything you fight over is static.

Yah, lol, but, i mean, i have to ask, but, are you serious?

"Darkfall didnt fail, theres just pretty much noone that wants to play it" Shadowbane? Please. This is ridiculous.

[Niburu]

Yah, lol, but, i mean, i have to ask, but, are you serious?

"Darkfall didnt fail, theres just pretty much noone that wants to play it" Shadowbane? Please. This is ridiculous.

As he said #3 open PVP game. There are not many open PVP games out there. Darkfall has got the money back it cost to make the game and AV has a new office building and his own animation studio. So i think yes they were successful. If AV would also stick abit more to there pre beta ideas this game would be much more successful but DF is only a light sandbox and atm REALLy light

Hopefully Xsyon will be a real sandbox with a good fair combat system

[Goqua]

We all knew it was a FFA PVP game. That's why we're here. Making tribal safe zones optional is garbage. They either are or are not. If it's based on alignment, fine, but no toggles.

[MrKrueak]

We all knew it was a FFA PVP game. That's why we're here. Making tribal safe zones optional is garbage. They either are or are not. If it's based on alignment, fine, but no toggles.

what you think you knew is not correct, tribal areas were always going to be optional safe zones, check feature page again.

Combat

Combat combines manual targeting and clicking with the final blow success based on the many factors – statistics, skills, weapon type, defense skills, armor and the opponents stance.

Skill and statistic based combat.
Manual targeting, affected by abilities.
Manual defense tactics including dodging, parrying and blocking.
Body part targeting for critical attacks.
Weapon types versus armor types.
Combat permissions in tribe zones based on tribal settings.
Combat will be revised during the Prelude and improved to match combat oriented games.

[coca]

Perhaps making a "safe" structure inside your zone with a door on it that you can kick someone out of.. the rest of your "area" might induce a slight penality to an attacker but not give the defender GOD MODE... that is just dumb.

[MrKrueak]

You realize the feature list has been revised several times since last March, right?

yes i'm sure it has, but everything i have read the devs have always stated that xyson was never meant to be a pure pvp ffa game. maybe i'm wrong but that is my impression.

[Goqua]

what you think you knew is not correct, tribal areas were always going to be optional safe zones, check feature page again.

Combat

Combat combines manual targeting and clicking with the final blow success based on the many factors – statistics, skills, weapon type, defense skills, armor and the opponents stance.

Skill and statistic based combat.
Manual targeting, affected by abilities.
Manual defense tactics including dodging, parrying and blocking.
Body part targeting for critical attacks.
Weapon types versus armor types.
Combat permissions in tribe zones based on tribal settings.
Combat will be revised during the Prelude and improved to match combat oriented games.

The last time I read the feature section, alignment dictated if the tribe was a safe area or not, not a toggle, and not something arbitrary. Good aligned tribes were safe in their tribal area, and evil tribes were not. These apparent advantages/disadvantages were offset by player behavior rules because of alignment. If something has changed since then, then I am unaware. There absolutely has to be some safe zones, no matter what. These are called start locations. Even if it's only a ten foot radius around where you start in game. I suppose that Darkfall's and Eve's solution is fine. Kill in starter "town" or high security "zone" and get wasted by the game. I'm fine with no safe zones other than that, including FFA tribal zones. If they want to give good tribes safety in their tribal zones (their Gods shine upon them or what not...), then I'm fine with that too. More fun for the evil tribes, who like to run around and grief people. Good folks can't run around and grief people, without becoming evil and open for killing by other good players, right? Based on my last estimation, it would have worked fine. If you want to go around and grief, then fine, but don't expect safety anywhere. If you want to be good and build a magnificent trade hub, then great, but you can't go crazy killing people wherever you want. Seems fine to me.

[BigCountry]

yes i'm sure it has, but everything i have read the devs have always stated that xyson was never meant to be a pure pvp ffa game.

What exactly is a "pure pvp ffa game"?

[Virtus]

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/1440-Xsyon-Updates?p=46756#post46756

[willbonney]

Hey all. Would you all mind going to my "suggestion" post in the suggestion thread and submitting your thoughts/ideas on the idea I had for a PvP system. I'd appreciate it a lot.

For those about to Troll me, I salute you. ;P

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3869-My-PvP-Idea?p=46852#post46852

[mrwooj]

I don't really care about safezones that much I just don't want a game where almost everyone and their mom is a "Red" lunatic who (tries to) kill every person that comes within view distance. There's already 2 games out in that department.

I totally agree with this

[mrwooj]

And it's back to being all about the solo players and the small tribes vs the big tribes again. So once you big tribes all have your walls and your gates, it's Prelude over, let the killing of the solo players and the small tribes begin? How nice for you, you'll have all our stuff. I'm sure you'll also have a great deal of fun, at least until you've driven everyone who doesn't play your chosen style out of the game and you are all bored of making up reasons to attack the people you were allied with during your takeover phase. Hooray for the political zerg, we win, time to go play something else now? That's some future you have in mind.

I'm not saying it's not realistic. That's exactly how it really is. It's just not any fun, and it renders all systems of good, evil, and neutral utterly meaningless. Plus, it won't take you more than a month after Prelude to accomplish.

I hear what you are saying. Fully open PVP and full, open conquering will make this game a no-go for solo players. Regardless of what other people think, there is a decent sized contingency of solo players who want to play this game and want to have PVP. I am one of them. I am hoping that Jordi will see sense and make a nice balance between the two playstyles, otherwise this game will become another Darkfall/MO and i sure as hell dont want that and would leave the game. If i feel this way then surely a lot of others do too. Imagine all the Asshats from DF that would end up here. I would love to see this game have game mechanics that force people NOT to be griefers and keep away all the worst of what forumfall has to offer. Regardless of whether you want to PVP or no PVP the common denominator i see in this forum, which of course is the best gauge of the people inside the game is that there is a good respect for each other. Open the PVP and conquering fully and what we will see overnight is a bunch of 12yo twitch griefers destroy this community both in the forums and in the actual game.

[ifireallymust]

I hear what you are saying. Fully open PVP and full, open conquering will make this game a no-go for solo players. Regardless of what other people think, there is a decent sized contingency of solo players who want to play this game and want to have PVP. I am one of them. I am hoping that Jordi will see sense and make a nice balance between the two playstyles, otherwise this game will become another Darkfall/MO and i sure as hell dont want that and would leave the game. If i feel this way then surely a lot of others do too. Imagine all the Asshats from DF that would end up here. I would love to see this game have game mechanics that force people NOT to be griefers and keep away all the worst of what forumfall has to offer. Regardless of whether you want to PVP or no PVP the common denominator i see in this forum, which of course is the best gauge of the people inside the game is that there is a good respect for each other. Open the PVP and conquering fully and what we will see overnight is a bunch of 12yo twitch griefers destroy this community both in the forums and in the actual game.

Well now we have plenty of time to figure out how to defend against anything the big tribes can think up. Maybe some type of loose coalition of homesteaders who come to the defense of each other when needed and periodically get together to attack tribes that constantly target us but otherwise go about our own private business? Traders could get warnings of safe and unsafe areas to trade in, and if there are things tribes can't get or make later that solo players and small tribes high in the mountains can get, they would have to keep their areas safe and lawful in order to get the trade they'll need.


Edited to add: If this idea catches on, maybe we could even ask for a homestead channel to sub to. But even if not, there are always outside communications.

[mrwooj]

Darkfall never failed. Behind Shadowbane and EvE it is the #3 mmorpg far as open pvp during this decade. Darkfall is very much alive and kicking, it just lacks in created sandbox content - everything you fight over is static.

You forget to mention that DF is one hell of a macrofest and there is no way to be competitive unless you are maxed. DF is dying a slow death due to lack of change in regards to any useful improvements, lack of communication from Devs, exploits galore, grindfest, macrofest and griefers both ingame and in forum, etc, etc. Darkfall has failed because Av dont have a clue what their game is like to actually play. Lets say it is terminally ill - imminent death coming eventually. I just hope the worst contingent of players in DF dont move to here, so all i can do is hope that game mechanics dont allow for griefers, macroers and cheats

[BigCountry]

I don't really care about safezones that much I just don't want a game where almost everyone and their mom is a "Red" lunatic who (tries to) kill every person that comes within view distance. There's already 2 games out in that department.

When an evil aligned ("Red") character dies, they respawn all the way back at their totem. Trust me, we tested it, it sucks and is proper punishment. Because if they are PvP'ing with a group, and 1 dies, he/she is out sorta speak. It's a good system. You guys will be fine. Just always be on guard, this is a FFA PvP game, so if your outside your territory, always be on the look out.

[Doc]

When an evil aligned ("Red") character dies, they respawn all the way back at their totem. Trust me, we tested it, it sucks and is proper punishment. Because if they are PvP'ing with a group, and 1 dies, he/she is out sorta speak. It's a good system. You guys will be fine. Just always be on guard, this is a FFA PvP game, so if your outside your territory, always be on the look out.

Lol, thats minor incovenience, another one of reward with no risk "want to gank" posts.

Even pure "carebear" PvE only games have more consequences to dying.

[yoori]

When an evil aligned ("Red") character dies, they respawn all the way back at their totem. Trust me, we tested it, it sucks and is proper punishment. Because if they are PvP'ing with a group, and 1 dies, he/she is out sorta speak. It's a good system. You guys will be fine. Just always be on guard, this is a FFA PvP game, so if your outside your territory, always be on the look out.

Unless evil tribe doesn't set their tribe just next to yours. Evil hopi is a homestead(I think) and they are about 30s sprint from our tribe. That's about 2min break for them after death.

Penalty that was considered is stat loss at death, combined with stat loss from hunger and thirst, and (probably) stat loss form low comfort, add to it lessend skill effectiveness(combat too) from all of the above and you have to thnk if you want to grief others(unless you bought the game only to grief for few days and leave).

[Grushenko]

Or if my (hypotetical) 50 men tribe want to grief your (hypotetical again) 20 men tribe. Not because i enjoy to grief people but because your tribe hold the only basalt spot in the area and i want it. Lot of people here don't want the main totem to be destroyed after the prelude coz "i spent 6 month to build my city and i don't want a griefer to take it way; i want it as a safe zone". This lead straight to a forced grief mechanic: i can't siege you so i'm going to kill you every single time you go out from your safe zone untill you don't move or unistall the game. Hard griefing to prevent from some random griefing.

This is exactly what is gonna happen if safe zone will stay in after prelude. And same in the prelude probably. Clarification on a siege system is needed asap.


I hope that devs will put in something similar to EVE. That can be perfect and also open the game to a major commercial choises.

[yoori]

Well that's my (hypothetical) 20 men tribe's choice. If you want to stay outside of war don't claim rare resources.
It that simple. Make best you can with what you got and trade for what you need.

[FabricSoftener]

Or if my (hypotetical) 50 men tribe want to grief your (hypotetical again) 20 men tribe. Not because i enjoy to grief people but because your tribe hold the only basalt spot in the area and i want it. Lot of people here don't want the main totem to be destroyed after the prelude coz "i spent 6 month to build my city and i don't want a griefer to take it way; i want it as a safe zone". This lead straight to a forced grief mechanic: i can't siege you so i'm going to kill you every single time you go out from your safe zone untill you don't move or unistall the game. Hard griefing to prevent from some random griefing.

This is exactly what is gonna happen if safe zone will stay in after prelude. And same in the prelude probably. Clarification on a siege system is needed asap.


I hope that devs will put in something similar to EVE. That can be perfect and also open the game to a major commercial choises.

I think greiving tactics to the point of trying to get an entire tribe to move might be a little hard in this game. I could be wrong but it would seem at least for now it would be a lot easier to get that basalt either outright attacking with the seige mechanics that are not yet in the game, find another spot, or sneak in and steal.

Grieving can cause a great deal of game time spent with very little assests to show for it.

[Grushenko]

A grieving tactic could be hard but not that much if i outnumber the tribe i want to move. I used basalt coz is kinda a rare resource but can be anything. And sure, is absolutely easyer to take it by steal, or buying or whatever. But if i want to have the basalt monopoly in my region so i can base my economy on it i obviously have to own it. With safe zones this is not possible and the political side of the game si going to be borken.

I'm not against safe zone in the beginning, we all need time to build the world and welcome new players. We need it, and the game need it. But as us pvper (i'm not an hardcore pvper but i like it) are asking, those safe zones can't last forever. I also know that lot of "carebears" here are fine with no safe zones in 6-9 months once cityes are built and defended. But i also noticed that they don't want the main totem to be siegeable. I can undestand, but i also think that this will be bad for the game lifespan.

[FabricSoftener]

A grieving tactic could be hard but not that much if i outnumber the tribe i want to move. I used basalt coz is kinda a rare resource but can be anything. And sure, is absolutely easyer to take it by steal, or buying or whatever. But if i want to have the basalt monopoly in my region so i can base my economy on it i obviously have to own it. With safe zones this is not possible and the political side of the game si going to be borken.

I'm not against safe zone in the beginning, we all need time to build the world and welcome new players. We need it, and the game need it. But as us pvper (i'm not an hardcore pvper but i like it) are asking, those safe zones can't last forever. I also know that lot of "carebears" here are fine with no safe zones in 6-9 months once cityes are built and defended. But i also noticed that they don't want the main totem to be siegeable. I can undestand, but i also think that this will be bad for the game lifespan.

both in darkfall and in this game my stance is the same and rather simple. All pvp should be war mechanics only. In short, you should have to declare war on tribe to attack them and to attack in the tribe land you should have to declare seige which then leaves your land open to attack from them as well.
seige mechancis could be long term or short term I would be open for discussion on that however overall its painfully clear to me how the system should work.

In short, if you want to pvp that is fine, declare war.

[Grushenko]

In short, if you want to pvp that is fine, declare war.

I'm perfectly fine with that. Hope that we won't lack on a war system/siege mechanics.

[coca]

M2S has officially declared war on EVERY TRIBE playing the game.. just to clear things up.

[MrKrueak]

M2S is what gives PVP players their bad name

[Zheo]

i knew it will be FFA PvP and if it wasnt i wouldnt be here.

[FabricSoftener]

i knew it will be FFA PvP and if it wasnt i wouldnt be here.

if there was a pve game that had deep crafting and allowed me and my 'clan' to build outposts, villages etc I wouldnt be playing this game :)

I have been playing video games for a very long time and to be frank if I never killed another anything for the rest of my gaming career that would be fine. Yeah its fun but after a few decades it really gets old.

[MrKrueak]

i'm not against ffa pvp at all myself, i just think there needs to be some sort of enforced guidelines to deter griefing/ganking. the consequences needs to be severe

[river111]

I'm so happy that me, one lil guy, way up in the mountains all by myself, on my 30m radius safe spot is such a big threat to the lifestyle of Bigcountry and JC and the likes that they would threaten to leave the game entirely if they dont have the ability to come on my land and destroy my one leather tent. Its a game changer they say, out of the entire world, my 30m radius plot, the only place I'm ever safe, 22 seconds of walk time from end to end, is a game changer for them. Impossible to play the game if a safe zone is in effect for just me on my itty bitty plot of land way up in the mountains.

Look yeah I get it, your worried about the tribal warfare, fine here is a simple solution to the headache. That optional turn on/off deal for safe zones after prelude, make it homesteads ONLY. Make the tribes fight, leave the lil guy alone. You dont gain anything from the little guy anyway by griefing him. Its not enjoyable to burn down one tent and kill the same naked dude over and over to you (well some of you do but you get my point).

Tribal warfare yes, for tribes yes. Hermit, crazy white dude with tthe beard to his bellybutton, leave him alone k.

[ifireallymust]

I'm so happy that me, one lil guy, way up in the mountains all by myself, on my 30m radius safe spot is such a big threat to the lifestyle of Bigcountry and JC and the likes that they would threaten to leave the game entirely if they dont have the ability to come on my land and destroy my one leather tent. Its a game changer they say, out of the entire world, my 30m radius plot, the only place I'm ever safe, 22 seconds of walk time from end to end, is a game changer for them. Impossible to play the game if a safe zone is in effect for just me on my itty bitty plot of land way up in the mountains.

Look yeah I get it, your worried about the tribal warfare, fine here is a simple solution to the headache. That optional turn on/off deal for safe zones after prelude, make it homesteads ONLY. Make the tribes fight, leave the lil guy alone. You dont gain anything from the little guy anyway by griefing him. Its not enjoyable to burn down one tent and kill the same naked dude over and over to you (well some of you do but you get my point).

Tribal warfare yes, for tribes yes. Hermit, crazy white dude with tthe beard to his bellybutton, leave him alone k.

Not a bad idea. Or make a Homestead radius protectable through means that a Tribe-sized area isn't. A special barricade or similar that must be maintained, so that Homesteaders must make an effort to protect themselves, and so the land can be claimed if someone goes innactive for too long.

[coca]

I remeber this one guy talking about something similar to this... I think he proposed having a perimeter that induced a penality to an attacker and that any structures within that are that could be gone into a door close would have the ability to kick someone out of it... instead of I think he said defenders getting automatic GOD MODE when attacked.

I think that same person would argue with river hermit about sure your little ole 30m plot ... but would ask that hermet to walkoutside the safe zone and look at how many tribe totems are in any given are and imagine the game with 90% of them as safezones.... imagine 10 fold the amount of players and safezone over what we have now.. pretty soon you have a boreing world that lacks any resemblance of compitition.

[Grushenko]

This is exploitable. My tribe could just start a bunch of close homesteads and we can be safe forever and acting like a tribe.

[river111]

This is exploitable. My tribe could just start a bunch of close homesteads and we can be safe forever and acting like a tribe.

Yes you could, and your tribe wouldnt have any of the perks of being a tirbe then. Every member would only be safe on thier own homestead, if they wanted to go help a friend they would have to drop the rescourses outside thier land and thats as far as they could go. They wouldnt be safe there either. The scrap pile would have to be left outside homestead land other wise the other members in thier own homesteads would be encrouching on tribal lands when they attemped to take from it.

Sure you would have more safe zones, but you guys are thinking like a PvPer, you expect people to cheat becuase well, PvPers do. Any and all exploits which can be used to help you survive in a dog eat dog society is acceptable to a PvPer. Like plitting up to homesteads now so your tribe can drop homesteads ANYWHERE and dig pits and build indestrucable dirt walls only to pick the homestead up and move on. Yes, everything can be exploited, and given the chance every PvP player will use those exploits as part of thier game. This isnt' the way everyone plays though, thats where your getting it wrong. Thats just you, as a PvPer, how you would USE it to your advantage.

A tribe, non-evil that is, comes together for the social aspect, to work together on a common goal. To build the town, grow in size, see a sense of accomplishment. Get the chosing your own currancy, building a bank, and action house, sharing tools and recipes, and geear. Thats what the non-PvP people do. They would have NO NEED of splitting into homesteads just to have a safe zone thats 60m accross. It would defeat every purpose they have in playing in a tribe in the first place.

So dont go thinking just because it could be exploited by some, that it will be exploited by all. Chances are the ONLY people who would exploit this are PvP griefer/gankers. And that my friend is the Gods honest truth and you know it.
\
Oh and just to add ot this, an easy way to fix the exploit is simple, PvP flag. IF you have engaged in PvP, either attack or defend, then your safe zone will NOT work for you for the next 30 minutes, period. You can also use this flag for the drop on a tribal/homestead tote. too - if you have engaged in PvP combat, again, you can not place a totem for 30 minutes.

[ifireallymust]

Maybe there's an even better way, though, one that would let tribes of >5 still have a chance to defend themselves against bigger tribes. Maybe a strength of that protection (whatever it is) that diminishes with both number of tribe members and size of territory. So a tribe of 30 would have less protection than a tribe of 8.

[river111]

I'd be happy with a war totem myself. A ranking member of one tribe, given the priv for it, would be able to move into an enemy tribe territory and drop a war totem. The war totem would have the same radius as thier own tribe has and would negate the safe zone inside it until it is destroyed. Each tribe would only be able to drop say 3 war totems in a 24 hour period but could drop all 3 at once, or one after the other. Inside the warzone (created by the war totem) everything is fair game, destructive buildings, empty containers, open PK. Once the war totem is dropped howver the safe zone comes right back as normal.

You want some fun in PvP warfare, THIS would do it.

[Grushenko]

Yes you could, and your tribe wouldnt have any of the perks of being a tirbe then. Every member would only be safe on thier own homestead, if they wanted to go help a friend they would have to drop the rescourses outside thier land and thats as far as they could go. They wouldnt be safe there either. The scrap pile would have to be left outside homestead land other wise the other members in thier own homesteads would be encrouching on tribal lands when they attemped to take from it.

Sure you would have more safe zones, but you guys are thinking like a PvPer, you expect people to cheat becuase well, PvPers do. Any and all exploits which can be used to help you survive in a dog eat dog society is acceptable to a PvPer. Like plitting up to homesteads now so your tribe can drop homesteads ANYWHERE and dig pits and build indestrucable dirt walls only to pick the homestead up and move on. Yes, everything can be exploited, and given the chance every PvP player will use those exploits as part of thier game. This isnt' the way everyone plays though, thats where your getting it wrong. Thats just you, as a PvPer, how you would USE it to your advantage.

A tribe, non-evil that is, comes together for the social aspect, to work together on a common goal. To build the town, grow in size, see a sense of accomplishment. Get the chosing your own currancy, building a bank, and action house, sharing tools and recipes, and geear. Thats what the non-PvP people do. They would have NO NEED of splitting into homesteads just to have a safe zone thats 60m accross. It would defeat every purpose they have in playing in a tribe in the first place.


So dont go thinking just because it could be exploited by some, that it will be exploited by all. Chances are the ONLY people who would exploit this are PvP griefer/gankers. And that my friend is the Gods honest truth and you know it.
\
Oh and just to add ot this, an easy way to fix the exploit is simple, PvP flag. IF you have engaged in PvP, either attack or defend, then your safe zone will NOT work for you for the next 30 minutes, period. You can also use this flag for the drop on a tribal/homestead tote. too - if you have engaged in PvP combat, again, you can not place a totem for 30 minutes.


Well the way to fix this is even easyer: ban. But it would still remain an exploitable broken mechanic, and not an exploitable bug.

I played Df as my whole tribe/guild/whatever, and i know what an exploit can provide, also if just the 2% of the server abuse of it. Ask everyone about the power some clans had in the past due to exploits.
The game will be wasted in 2 months. So i'm sorry but the devs can't let something pass just coz "hey, just few ***** abuse of it".
Nothing about think as pvper, but only thinking about a fair game.



I'd be happy with a war totem myself. A ranking member of one tribe, given the priv for it, would be able to move into an enemy tribe territory and drop a war totem. The war totem would have the same radius as thier own tribe has and would negate the safe zone inside it until it is destroyed. Each tribe would only be able to drop say 3 war totems in a 24 hour period but could drop all 3 at once, or one after the other. Inside the warzone (created by the war totem) everything is fair game, destructive buildings, empty containers, open PK. Once the war totem is dropped howver the safe zone comes right back as normal.

You want some fun in PvP warfare, THIS would do it.

Why so messy? Declare war = no more safe zones for both.

[JCatano]

if there was a pve game that had deep crafting and allowed me and my 'clan' to build outposts, villages etc I wouldnt be playing this game :)

I have been playing video games for a very long time and to be frank if I never killed another anything for the rest of my gaming career that would be fine. Yeah its fun but after a few decades it really gets old.

http://www.roma-victor.com/

"RedBedlam is currently focussed exclusively on developing projects for third parties. It is worth bearing in mind however that a great deal of work was put into the project codenamed 'Roma Victor 2', and we still have every intention of releasing a top quality historically authentic 'remake' at a later date."

[FPrime]

I'd be happy with a war totem myself. A ranking member of one tribe, given the priv for it, would be able to move into an enemy tribe territory and drop a war totem. The war totem would have the same radius as thier own tribe has and would negate the safe zone inside it until it is destroyed. Each tribe would only be able to drop say 3 war totems in a 24 hour period but could drop all 3 at once, or one after the other. Inside the warzone (created by the war totem) everything is fair game, destructive buildings, empty containers, open PK. Once the war totem is dropped howver the safe zone comes right back as normal.

You want some fun in PvP warfare, THIS would do it.

That war totem idea is actually really cool. Maybe it wouldn't end up exactly as you describe it since that's kind of based off some assumptions about how things will work, but the concept of a war totem is neat.

Make a thread about that idea in the suggestions section. I think it's something Jooky should consider as he puts together the details for the tribal warfare system.

[orious13]

Bump War totem!!!

[STAR_GOD]

YAY we can kill people!

[Kinslayer]

Without reading the thread... yeh, duh.

[dxwarlock]

"Did you know this will be a FFA PVP game?"

No one told me this was a game, I'm outraged and shocked...
I'm glad you brought this to my attention.

[bruisie159]

yes

[Honelith]

Sure you can FFA PVP in this game, but that small portion of the game alone will offer you nothing when compared to what this game is truly about, so quit smudging the paint! You say PVP and I think of horrible nasty things associated with PVP in games. You say it's a crafting game and I think of the good enjoyable times I've had in previous sandbox games.

[KeithStone]

...you expect people to cheat becuase well, PvPers do.

I expect crafters to exploit because well, Crafters do.

[FabricSoftener]

wait...this game has combat? i had no idea

[randomt]

if there was a pve game that had deep crafting and allowed me and my 'clan' to build outposts, villages etc I wouldnt be playing this game :)

I have been playing video games for a very long time and to be frank if I never killed another anything for the rest of my gaming career that would be fine. Yeah its fun but after a few decades it really gets old.

A tale in the Desert is all of the above.

[kombi]

while alot of the carebear groups dont want open pvp i think having it will be great.. think of this...

your a carebare crafter group... evil tribe takes an interested in you.. sieges you till you make a treaty with them.. you provide them with goods.. they protect you.. they get all powerful and keep your land safe.. you give them a cut and go back to carebear life..

sure.. you pay some for that carebear life.. but hey..

[FabricSoftener]

A tale in the Desert is all of the above.

Intresting actually I looked into a bit I might look into it more.

If I was less lazy I would/should just go back to making mods in Neverwinter nights.

[ifireallymust]

while alot of the carebear groups dont want open pvp i think having it will be great.. think of this...

your a carebare crafter group... evil tribe takes an interested in you.. sieges you till you make a treaty with them.. you provide them with goods.. they protect you.. they get all powerful and keep your land safe.. you give them a cut and go back to carebear life..

sure.. you pay some for that carebear life.. but hey..

Yeah, that sounds like fulfilling gameplay right there.

[dxwarlock]

while alot of the carebear groups dont want open pvp i think having it will be great.. think of this...

your a carebare crafter group... evil tribe takes an interested in you.. sieges you till you make a treaty with them.. you provide them with goods.. they protect you.. they get all powerful and keep your land safe.. you give them a cut and go back to carebear life..

sure.. you pay some for that carebear life.. but hey..

yea, weve seen how many times thats played out in previous MMO's.. :P
its more like they take interest in you, see your easy to kill..you offer a treaty they tell you "have some balls fight us off like a MAN!"..carebear tribe tries, they get called noobs..and the treaty falls on deaf ears. the best they get is an offer to 'merge' into the attcking group to be the slave crafting labor to supply their PvP needs.

the 10% of the PvP population that would accept a treaty of sorts, wont make up for the 90% that do the above.

[fflhktsn]

yea, weve seen how many times thats played out in previous MMO's.. :P
its more like they take interest in you, see your easy to kill..you offer a treaty they tell you "have some balls fight us off like a MAN!"..carebear tribe tries, they get called noobs..and the treaty falls on deaf ears. the best they get is an offer to 'merge' into the attcking group to be the slave crafting labor to supply their PvP needs.

the 10% of the PvP population that would accept a treaty of sorts, wont make up for the 90% that do the above.

so were comparing games where the only option to really progress was to kill others, to a game with a solid crafting system, and other methods to occupy gamers time?

all those games had was a combat sytem, and combat related skills (for the most part) to progress on, which is why everyone decided to just pvp. Also i dont see a gank skill in game in which to grind.

quit pretending this game is anything like those games already.

[Caffy]

pretty funny reading the hypothetical... :)

[FabricSoftener]

so were comparing games where the only option to really progress was to kill others, to a game with a solid crafting system, and other methods to occupy gamers time?

all those games had was a combat sytem, and combat related skills (for the most part) to progress on, which is why everyone decided to just pvp. Also i dont see a gank skill in game in which to grind.

quit pretending this game is anything like those games already.

I think Hello Kitty might actually have a more developed combat engine then Xyson at the moment.

[dxwarlock]

quit pretending this game is anything like those games already.

Im comparing human psyche and mentality in competitive games, and how some people conduct themselves in online games when there is a opportunity to display their alpha male status by force.

so your saying not only is xsyon a game, but a social reconditioning tool that can reverse human nature of domination when anonymity and accountability can be side skirted?

[xyberviri]

I don't really care about safezones that much I just don't want a game where almost everyone and their mom is a "Red" lunatic who (tries to) kill every person that comes within view distance. There's already 2 games out in that department.

This, i dont want safe zones how ever i also dont want the people that think just because theres no safe zones then that must mean that game is a 24/7 pvp gank fest

[NorCalGooey]

I know tribes in our area communicate pretty well about gankers and griefers

In a game like this if you try to gank and you are in a large tribe you risk getting kicked out if your tribe doesn't like unnecessary conflict. Or you may start a war which will get you kicked out.

And of course bands and homesteads won't really stand much of a chance against larger tribes. It's the little guys that have to worry about not having a chance to fight back, IMO. Just don't be an asshole in the game and make friends, things will be good. That doesn't mean when you are 20 zones away you can't go kill people occasionally if that is your style. Just don't mess with close by zones IMO

If we even see any sort of ganking or PVP the whole tribe and some surrounding tribes will know the players name immediately and if you call for 100 players in one zone (if we ever get to that many active players again...haha) on to 1 ganker he will likely be found and hunted down.

If you wanted to be really kind about it whoever hunted down the ganker would return the lost items to the member of the alliance of tribes who was ganked. I think this game will get really interesting....by 2012...lol

[xyberviri]

Maybe all you PVE Care Bear Crafters should stop Care bearing up all the games that keep coming out with your my way or the high way crap.

I like the option of being attacked or attacking some one, i dont like artificial limits placed on a game when im trading with some one. I like that i might have to distrust the people im meeting since they might attack me and steal my stuff.

Im not saying that the game has to be quake online 24.7, i like to craft and rp and pvp, but Its like the ride they have to remove from the amusement park because some people said its too scary.

Its like all the religious people that are always tring to say your going to <insertafterlifeseneriohere> because you dont believe in what they say and your wrong.

[Jadzia]

Why necro this thread ?

[NorCalGooey]

catchy title Jadzia. that's my guess :)

[fatboy21007]

stop harrasing ancient threads!

[PeonSanders911]

The only reason im playing this game, is that it promised to be a FFA PvP game...
The second they carebear it up, im gone.....

[goodayve]

Maybe all you PVE Care Bear Crafters should stop Care bearing up all the games that keep coming out with your my way or the high way crap.

I like the option of being attacked or attacking some one, i dont like artificial limits placed on a game when im trading with some one. I like that i might have to distrust the people im meeting since they might attack me and steal my stuff.



Trade ganking is never fun. And does not need to be part of any game.

FFA pvp doesnt mean you have to have unsafe tradeing.

Edit: wanted to add that carrying the goods would always still be dangerous. But there would need to be some kind of sales, like the totem, which might be enough. Then you still have to carry your item to the totem and then carry the item you buy back to your place. Which is how all trades will mostly happen when it is unsafe.

My answer to the question of this poll would still be I dont know if they will have any kind of safe area. Being able to attack anyone anywhere I guess is what people want.

So maybe they would be happy like UO towns. Where you could attack someone or steal from them in town but every time you will get 1hit killed by a guard.

Some of my posts might look like I am agaisnt FFA pvp, but I have had a lot of fun in ffa pvp games. I dont know if people just want to be able to suicide kill people like UO, darkfall and eve. I guess suicide killing people is fun for some. So most likely that will be your ffa pvp.

I dont actually want any dev to look at my opinion and make any decisions from it though.(so i havent actually voted in any of these polls)

[ColonelTEE3]

Trade ganking is never fun. And does not need to be part of any game.

FFA pvp doesnt mean you have to have unsafe tradeing.

Heres the thing about trade ganking... the price the ganker pays is infinitely higher than whatever they acquired. The title of trade ganker in mmos is about as prevalent and socially stigmatizing as being a sex offender in reality. Everywhere you go, the word will spread, that you at some point trade ganked, and your ability to trade with anyone in game (outside maybe your trade ganking clan) will be forever heavily restricted.

In darkfall, not longer after launch, there was a clan called "macS". They trade-ganked once as far as i knew. Two years later, in the same game, someone in trade asked about buying or selling something, and their last name was "macS", spelled with the same capitalization and all. Following his message, someone called him out on being a trade ganker because he was identified with that clan. This was two years following what ever incident landed them that title.

The social penalty for trade ganking is so enormous that those foolish enough not to think about the long term consequences will definitely regret it afterward.

What im saying is that we absolutely don't need some shitty built in mechanics to prevent trade ganking or other ganking or many of the systematic restrictions placed on players from acting maliciously, because the game community will handle itself. The only people in this forum that don't believe a server community can self regulate things like trade ganking are people who never actually played games where it could happen, or saw the repercussions. The same theory can be applied to zerg forces that think they can force a server into submission and never be challenged by the oppressed.

[Book]

The only reason im playing this game, is that it promised to be a FFA PvP game...
The second they carebear it up, im gone.....

isn't that the "my way or the highway" thing Xyberviri was talking about? Perhaps he should revise the accusation to be a bit more encompassing than the carebear thing :D

I don't think it's really about NEVER being attacked. I agree that the uncertainty in the people I meet adds to the fun and the immersion.

The problem is with the 24/7 regardless of what others feel like doing at the very moment. It's that mentality that winds up calling for artificial intervention, which is unfortunate.

[xyberviri]

There has to be a acceptable middle ground, focusing strictly on the pvp mechanic is not really the way i think this should be addressed.

the game is FFA PVP with limited safe zones, the problem isn't that you have the mechanic its that theres no way to prevent people from abusing the mechanic that causes issues with players that dont like dieing.

there has to be a way to discourage or prevent it but not artificially like how you dont duel people in towns in UO unless you wanna die and loose your stuff.

[Dubanka]

Does anybody actually get attacked these days? or is this all hyphotheticalspeak about getting attacked?

another discussion that has been had many times. There is no common ground...there is the crowd that wants their guaranteed safe zone, and the crowd that thinks that stupid (whether the 'stupid' verdict is becaus they are a rabid pvpr, or they understand the potential exploits that come with any 'safe' bubble is a different issue).

Summary of the various discussions: It doesnt matter. It is what it is until the devs decide otherwise, and that verdict could be anything, since it has flip flopped several times in the past year.

[goodayve]

I think there is a middle ground somewhere that will work out.

A lot of people look back on UO and think that was the FFA pvp game with no safe zones but of course it was not even close to that. I started playing it in 1998.

UO from the start had safe zones. Once you were inside your house or tower and you knew no one else had a key you were completly 100% safe.(not counting exploits like going inside the house as a ghost and getting rezd inside, but even then if you had a tower you could lock yourself inside the inner rooms, or just place boxs infront of your closed door. Or killing people early on with earthquake from outside, before my time)

Sure you had to worry about people killing you and takeing your key, or hideing nearby and running inside. (this of course was before stealth which never really turned into a big house break in tool.)

If you think about eve your 100% safe when docked in an npc station.

I would like to know what ffa pvp/loot game people ever played that did not have safe zones. I am not sure there is one out there.(you could list something like darkfall maybe, but why list a game that came out recently)The only big name title that I hear people mention in this type of game, that I did not play, is Shadowbane. Maybe shadowbane was ffa pvp/loot with no safe zone?

[MrDDT]

I think there is a middle ground somewhere that will work out.

A lot of people look back on UO and think that was the FFA pvp game with no safe zones but of course it was not even close to that. I started playing it in 1998.

UO from the start had safe zones. Once you were inside your house or tower and you knew no one else had a key you were completly 100% safe.(not counting exploits like going inside the house as a ghost and getting rezd inside, but even then if you had a tower you could lock yourself inside the inner rooms, or just place boxs infront of your closed door. Or killing people early on with earthquake from outside, before my time)

Sure you had to worry about people killing you and takeing your key, or hideing nearby and running inside. (this of course was before stealth which never really turned into a big house break in tool.)

If you think about eve your 100% safe when docked in an npc station.

I would like to know what ffa pvp/loot game people ever played that did not have safe zones. I am not sure there is one out there.(you could list something like darkfall maybe, but why list a game that came out recently)The only big name title that I hear people mention in this type of game, that I did not play, is Shadowbane. Maybe shadowbane was ffa pvp/loot with no safe zone?


Shadowbane had a "newbie" area which was 100% safe, it also had a few 100% safe cities.
Also Shadowbane was NOT full loot. It was inventory looting only.

UO didnt have a 100% safe area til trammel. BTW, Even in town you could steal from others. In your house you could die from AOE attacks. A few people had castles that were safe in some parts of the castle.

[Dubanka]

I think there is a middle ground somewhere that will work out.

A lot of people look back on UO and think that was the FFA pvp game with no safe zones but of course it was not even close to that. I started playing it in 1998.

UO from the start had safe zones. Once you were inside your house or tower and you knew no one else had a key you were completly 100% safe.(not counting exploits like going inside the house as a ghost and getting rezd inside, but even then if you had a tower you could lock yourself inside the inner rooms, or just place boxs infront of your closed door. Or killing people early on with earthquake from outside, before my time)

Sure you had to worry about people killing you and takeing your key, or hideing nearby and running inside. (this of course was before stealth which never really turned into a big house break in tool.)

If you think about eve your 100% safe when docked in an npc station.

I would like to know what ffa pvp/loot game people ever played that did not have safe zones. I am not sure there is one out there.(you could list something like darkfall maybe, but why list a game that came out recently)The only big name title that I hear people mention in this type of game, that I did not play, is Shadowbane. Maybe shadowbane was ffa pvp/loot with no safe zone?

the middle ground is...a very limited 'safe' area which allows players to gain a foothold in the game, figure out its mechanics, and generally prepares them to venture out into the wide wide world...the area would be limited in size, resources (type, not necessarily availability), an production ability (quality/condition limits for gear mproduced in safe zone), all with the intent of pushing the players into the wider world, but giving them a place to regroup if something went wrong.

middle ground is a 'protected' 6 slot pouch so you can store a couple valuable things if shit goes south...it's not being able to protect any bag you make.

but like i said. whatever. devs will do what they'll do.

[Book]

the middle ground is...a very limited 'safe' area which allows players to gain a foothold in the game, figure out its mechanics, and generally prepares them to venture out into the wide wide world...the area would be limited in size, resources (type, not necessarily availability), an production ability (quality/condition limits for gear mproduced in safe zone), all with the intent of pushing the players into the wider world, but giving them a place to regroup if something went wrong.

That doesn't really sound like "middle" :). Not saying it should never happen or whatever, just saying that's not "middle." :D


middle ground is a 'protected' 6 slot pouch so you can store a couple valuable things if shit goes south...it's not being able to protect any bag you make.

Was thinking about a similar thing a while back, do you mean a wearable pouch? That'd be cool. My understanding is that right now, any bag on my person is fully lootable no matter what the settings. Only bags on the ground have the ever so dreaded protections. Having maybe the front left pouch remain protected sure would be nice.


but like i said. whatever. devs will do what they'll do.

Yup. Ain't my mortgage on the line. :)

[MrDDT]

Was thinking about a similar thing a while back, do you mean a wearable pouch? That'd be cool. My understanding is that right now, any bag on my person is fully lootable no matter what the settings. Only bags on the ground have the ever so dreaded protections. Having maybe the front left pouch remain protected sure would be nice.

Sadly there are bags that are not lootable. Im not sure if its a bug or not but it happens.
Also people can just drop a bag and poof its "safe".

Kinda off topic, but this whole "die and teleport with all your loots back to base" is a bad idea.
It feels like exploiting when I tell someone. "Hey you die and go back with all the goods because it would take us hours to get back at that slow of speed with that weight" I feel dirty doing it.
Just FYI my guy is bugged so dont say IM exploiting it, because I cant teleport anywhere.
I dont think its an exploit but it feels like one. It needs to be changed. The system is bad for econ, resources, area control and so many other things.

[ColonelTEE3]

Sadly there are bags that are not lootable. Im not sure if its a bug or not but it happens.
Also people can just drop a bag and poof its "safe".

Kinda off topic, but this whole "die and teleport with all your loots back to base" is a bad idea.
It feels like exploiting when I tell someone. "Hey you die and go back with all the goods because it would take us hours to get back at that slow of speed with that weight" I feel dirty doing it.
Just FYI my guy is bugged so dont say IM exploiting it, because I cant teleport anywhere.
I dont think its an exploit but it feels like one. It needs to be changed. The system is bad for econ, resources, area control and so many other things.

As Jadzia so proudly reminded me once before, the difficulty / impossibility of looting someone is intentional, evidently. Not exactly full loot then, is it.

I agree on both your points. They need to change this to be a no-bullshit full loot, and they need to get rid of teleporting all your stuff with you when you die. Thats just flat out retarded for so many reasons.

[MrDDT]

As Jadzia so proudly reminded me once before, the difficulty / impossibility of looting someone is intentional, evidently. Not exactly full loot then, is it.

I agree on both your points. They need to change this to be a no-bullshit full loot, and they need to get rid of teleporting all your stuff with you when you die. Thats just flat out retarded for so many reasons.


Im pretty sure the "No looting in water" and "cant use this" issue with the bags on the person is NOT intentional they are bugs.

I do agree the difficulty ie. being close, 30seconds to loot, time to loot items, time to open bags etc, are planned and good ideas.

[ocoma]

I agree on both your points. They need to change this to be a no-bullshit full loot, and they need to get rid of teleporting all your stuff with you when you die. Thats just flat out retarded for so many reasons.

/agree with this.



I do agree the difficulty ie. being close, 30seconds to loot, time to loot items, time to open bags etc, are planned and good ideas.

Really? So you are fine with having a way to bypass the need to physically transport goods and possibly be ambushed on the way simply by suiciding with a full pack?

[MrDDT]

/agree with this.




Really? So you are fine with having a way to bypass the need to physically transport goods and possibly be ambushed on the way simply by suiciding with a full pack?

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3807-Did-you-know-this-will-be-a-FFA-PVP-game?p=81434&viewfull=1#post81434

Read that =P

Dunno how you got that idea.

[unclean666]

As far as people droping there bag there easy to get into if you have an alt or can jump in and out of your tribe.Just throw down a totem and you can open anyones stuff.

I laugh when people used to tell me they dont trust the tribe leaders so the put there stuff in the woods out of tribe area.

[ocoma]

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/3807-Did-you-know-this-will-be-a-FFA-PVP-game?p=81434&viewfull=1#post81434

Read that =P

Dunno how you got that idea.

Sorry from your post above I thought you were happy with the current looting system. I stand corrected.

[Book]

Wasn't there a time during beta when people didn't respawn at their totems, but instead respawned where they died? That would fix the problem of teleporting goods... but you inevitably have the little jokesters that will camp bodies just for the lulz of it all.

Blame them.

Also, I've only killed and looted someone once. Not terribly proud of it, but had to be done to get a point across. I have to say I had no trouble looting in 30 seconds... It's not a buffet man :) I don't want to lie there patiently while you look over the menu. Get in, get out, too slow, too bad.
Incidentally, the dude I looted did get everything back once he calmed down and we had a chance to talk a bit.

On the other hand, could it be a technical issue like the double-click bug makes it take longer for you, or a lag thing while you're looting, or a sync thing... you get my point.

[MrDDT]

As far as people droping there bag there easy to get into if you have an alt or can jump in and out of your tribe.Just throw down a totem and you can open anyones stuff.

I laugh when people used to tell me they dont trust the tribe leaders so the put there stuff in the woods out of tribe area.

I wouldnt say thats easy, sure it can be done but not super easy.
Or what if a friend drop a totem to protect it too.

Either way its not a system Im happy with, I hope it changes once the combat revamp is in the game.

[ColonelTEE3]

Kinda off topic, but this whole "die and teleport with all your loots back to base" is a bad idea.



I do agree the difficulty ie. being close, 30seconds to loot, time to loot items, time to open bags etc, are planned and good ideas.

Sorry DDT but i'm with ocoma, these two messages threw me off. You want it to be difficult to loot, and have there be a limited time frame to loot (which follows that whatever is not looted is either destroyed or kept by the player), but you dont want people to keep their stuff when they die and respawn with it?

[Book]

Sorry DDT but i'm with ocoma, these two messages threw me off. You want it to be difficult to loot, and have there be a limited time frame to loot (which follows that whatever is not looted is either destroyed or kept by the player), but you dont want people to keep their stuff when they die and respawn with it?

Maybe this will look very different if locks are introduced to go with the key slot we have in inventory. (unless that's only for gates)

It really shouldn't take more than 30 seconds to loot everything off someone's body... but whatever. Why make people wait while you casually take your time looting.

The bags though would be locked. You'd have to have a good lockpicking skill to open each one, which will take time. The bags remain after the body is resurrected so again, folks don't have to wait too long for you after they've already been killed.
You run the risk of a posse getting to you while you try your luck picking those locks, and the dead dude has a chance to get his stuff back... or lose another set of armor.

It honestly starts making the whole death thing kind of a pain in the youknowwhat but such is life... well, such is death.

Would love to see boobytraps introduced as a nice "right back at ya thief!" when bags are opened. Poisons, explosives, angry marmots... etc.

[MrDDT]

Sorry DDT but i'm with ocoma, these two messages threw me off. You want it to be difficult to loot, and have there be a limited time frame to loot (which follows that whatever is not looted is either destroyed or kept by the player), but you dont want people to keep their stuff when they die and respawn with it?

I can think of systems where this doesnt have to happen.

Plus really the main limiting factor is the 30seconds. Really IMO I think that should be removed the person looting should have a LOT of time to loot, but it should also take time to loot (to prevent battle looting etc).

I 100% DO NOT want re-spawning with items. Its bad for econ, it bad for trade, its bad for pvp, its bad for limited resources, it bad idea in even more ways I cant even think of yet.

[ColonelTEE3]

I can think of systems where this doesnt have to happen.

Plus really the main limiting factor is the 30seconds. Really IMO I think that should be removed the person looting should have a LOT of time to loot, but it should also take time to loot (to prevent battle looting etc).

I 100% DO NOT want re-spawning with items. Its bad for econ, it bad for trade, its bad for pvp, its bad for limited resources, it bad idea in even more ways I cant even think of yet.

Okay so you just want to avoid darkfall-like combat looting that can be done on a whim. That makes sense, and i support that idea a lot.

[NorCalGooey]

I can think of systems where this doesnt have to happen.

Plus really the main limiting factor is the 30seconds. Really IMO I think that should be removed the person looting should have a LOT of time to loot, but it should also take time to loot (to prevent battle looting etc).

I 100% DO NOT want re-spawning with items. Its bad for econ, it bad for trade, its bad for pvp, its bad for limited resources, it bad idea in even more ways I cant even think of yet.

Couldn't agree more. It's bad for everything except whining kids who lost their loots. But that is good for Xsyon because those players don't really benefit any game. They are actually the downfall of most.

NG seriously think about hiring MrDDT for his mostly rock solid ideas.

[ColonelTEE3]

Couldn't agree more. It's bad for everything except whining kids who lost their loots. But that is good for Xsyon because those players don't really benefit any game. They are actually the downfall of most.

NG seriously think about hiring MrDDT for his mostly rock solid ideas.

Like i said before, put people like DDT and dubanka in charge of leading this game's design and i guarantee at least the 30 or so of my tribe Anvil that left will come back, as well as many more. They have good ideas.

[dezgard]

Assuming its all about money...(the dreamer has awaken).

[NorCalGooey]

Like i said before, put people like DDT and dubanka in charge of leading this game's design and i guarantee at least the 30 or so of my tribe Anvil that left will come back, as well as many more. They have good ideas.

I actually have some fraps of AR and Pandemic retaliating against you guys for destroying our trees. Was the only PvP I've actually done in this game. Come on AR comes in peace, destroy Pandemic's trees when they respawn not ours :)

[Azhul_NS]

I can think of systems where this doesnt have to happen.

Plus really the main limiting factor is the 30seconds. Really IMO I think that should be removed the person looting should have a LOT of time to loot, but it should also take time to loot (to prevent battle looting etc).

I 100% DO NOT want re-spawning with items. Its bad for econ, it bad for trade, its bad for pvp, its bad for limited resources, it bad idea in even more ways I cant even think of yet.

I also disagree with respawning with items, but it does not hurt the economy - unless those items would have been destroyed. If they are looted by another player, they are still IN the economy. Actually, allowing looting of corpses hurts the economy, as PvPers have access to items without making or trading for them.

[ColonelTEE3]

I also disagree with respawning with items, but it does not hurt the economy - unless those items would have been destroyed. If they are looted by another player, they are still IN the economy. Actually, allowing looting of corpses hurts the economy, as PvPers have access to items without making or trading for them.

A tribe or tribes are less good at pvp than "super tribe A", they proceed to die in combat engagements against super tribe A. Their supply of gear equipment and resources depletes, and their demand for said gear equipment and resources increases, which is followed by the need to trade for it or produce it.

I'm not seeing how looting does anything bad to the economy. Having no decay on the other hand...

[Azhul_NS]

A tribe or tribes are less good at pvp than "super tribe A", they proceed to die in combat engagements against super tribe A. Their supply of gear equipment and resources depletes, and their demand for said gear equipment and resources increases, which is followed by the need to trade for it or produce it.

Super Tribe A's supply goes up, and their demand goes down, which reduces their need to trade for or make it.

All looting does is change the loot's owner. It doesn't remove it from the economy. Destroying the stuff held by a killed player would.


I'm not seeing how looting does anything bad to the economy. Having no decay on the other hand...

How fast would you want an item that can be made in 5 seconds to decay?

[ColonelTEE3]

Super Tribe A's supply goes up, and their demand goes down, which reduces their need to trade for or make it.

All looting does is change the loot's owner. It doesn't remove it from the economy. Destroying the stuff held by a killed player would.

In a way of looking at it, all an economy is, is the "changing of ownership" of goods, many times, circulating around a network. The decay of items, over time, is what destroys the goods. They may exchange hands but they will still break and need to be replaced. Even good pvpers die and lose gear. Even good pvpers will break their gear. They will never not need a supply of it supplemented from trade.

Even the best fighters in darkfall with all their top-end gear have to do some trading, because you get people who purposely "pre-break" their good gear from duels, so they can use it in a real fight and spite the enemy with nearly broken loot in the chance that they die. Otherwise, they can't sustain themselves only on the good gear of those they kill. They need to trade for it too.



How fast would you want an item that can be made in 5 seconds to decay?

Faster than not at all :)

Ideally, fast enough that active pvpers would need to replace their gear within a week of pvping daily. Harder to put a speed on decay for crafting in this game, that might just be a matter of trial by fire.

[Azhul_NS]

In a way of looking at it, all an economy is, is the "changing of ownership" of goods, many times, circulating around a network. The decay of items, over time, is what destroys the goods. They may exchange hands but they will still break and need to be replaced. Even good pvpers die and lose gear. Even good pvpers will break their gear. They will never not need a supply of it supplemented from trade.

Even the best fighters in darkfall with all their top-end gear have to do some trading, because you get people who purposely "pre-break" their good gear from duels, so they can use it in a real fight and spite the enemy with nearly broken loot in the chance that they die. Otherwise, they can't sustain themselves only on the good gear of those they kill. They need to trade for it too.

Decay should affect the item's effectiveness. GL fighting in nearly-broken gear, if it has lost most of it's effectiveness.


Faster than not at all :)

Sure. I am not against decay, but it's meaningless unless it approaches the speed at which the stuff can be replaced. An item can be made in several seconds (even a wall, FFS!), so to keep up...

This is why decay alone will be meaningless or obscenely fast. You have to slow down the production, as well.


Ideally, fast enough that active pvpers would need to replace their gear within a week of pvping daily. Harder to put a speed on decay for crafting in this game, that might just be a matter of trial by fire.

Indeed. It's probably going to be a bit painful.

[MrDDT]

In a way of looking at it, all an economy is, is the "changing of ownership" of goods, many times, circulating around a network. The decay of items, over time, is what destroys the goods. They may exchange hands but they will still break and need to be replaced. Even good pvpers die and lose gear. Even good pvpers will break their gear. They will never not need a supply of it supplemented from trade.

Even the best fighters in darkfall with all their top-end gear have to do some trading, because you get people who purposely "pre-break" their good gear from duels, so they can use it in a real fight and spite the enemy with nearly broken loot in the chance that they die. Otherwise, they can't sustain themselves only on the good gear of those they kill. They need to trade for it too.



Faster than not at all :)

Ideally, fast enough that active pvpers would need to replace their gear within a week of pvping daily. Harder to put a speed on decay for crafting in this game, that might just be a matter of trial by fire.


I agree, you look at DFO and the most active traders ARE the good pvpers. They need top end gear all the time. They have lower end gear they dont want, and they pay top dollar for top top end gear. I used to trade a lot in DFO and the best people to trade with were the ones that were very good, because they didnt spend time making it themselves.

See lower end players they will tend to try to do everything because in DFO there is no skill cap. So lower end people would try to save money and craft most of it themselves they would only buy raw mats. While top end players wouldnt care about crafting they didnt have issues with paying more because they rarely lost items other than decay. So they would spend a lot to get the best gear.

[Azhul_NS]

See lower end players they will tend to try to do everything because in DFO there is no skill cap. So lower end people would try to save money and craft most of it themselves they would only buy raw mats. While top end players wouldnt care about crafting they didnt have issues with paying more because they rarely lost items other than decay. So they would spend a lot to get the best gear.

Since there is no money in Xsyon, what are non-crafters going to pay with?

[Azhul_NS]

See lower end players they will tend to try to do everything because in DFO there is no skill cap. So lower end people would try to save money and craft most of it themselves they would only buy raw mats. While top end players wouldnt care about crafting they didnt have issues with paying more because they rarely lost items other than decay. So they would spend a lot to get the best gear.

Since there is no money in Xsyon, what are non-crafters going to pay with?

[MrDDT]

Since there is no money in Xsyon, what are non-crafters going to pay with?

Resources?
Even DFO uses resources for trading sometimes. Back in the day gold wasnt worth what it is now. People would trade for resources. Like rare ores for wood or stone, or weapons.

Did you really not know? or you just acting silly?

[ColonelTEE3]

Decay should affect the item's effectiveness. GL fighting in nearly-broken gear, if it has lost most of it's effectiveness.

Sure. I am not against decay, but it's meaningless unless it approaches the speed at which the stuff can be replaced. An item can be made in several seconds (even a wall, FFS!), so to keep up...

This is why decay alone will be meaningless or obscenely fast. You have to slow down the production, as well.


Indeed. It's probably going to be a bit painful.

You bring up a good question: how much will decay affect gear effectiveness? We won't know until we find out, but i suspect it wouldn't have an impact on the effectiveness as that requires extra coding for a scaling diminish of efficacy in response to an items "health". In df, your sword was as sharp as when it was made as before it broke in your hands, and i wont be surprised if its the same here, which is why i suggested we might see similar patterns in "breaking in" armor and weapons before players engage in real combat.

One other thing though -- you keep bringing up the speed things can be created, but not the resources involved. Yes people can make a full suit of armor in just a couple minutes... if they have everything they need. Loss of gear doesn't just mean more time spent clicking at the craft window. It means you need to get more cleaver blades, or more bone, or more racoon heads, or more belt buckles, etc. It inherently requires importing of goods you probably don't have an unlimited supply of.

[Azhul_NS]

One other thing though -- you keep bringing up the speed things can be created, but not the resources involved. Yes people can make a full suit of armor in just a couple minutes... if they have everything they need. Loss of gear doesn't just mean more time spent clicking at the craft window. It means you need to get more cleaver blades, or more bone, or more racoon heads, or more belt buckles, etc. It inherently requires importing of goods you probably don't have an unlimited supply of.

That is a good point, but guess how big people's stockpiles are going to be by the time the decay is added? Rare materials is a good way to reduce production. I would like to see those rare finds limited to open areas where tribal totems cannot be placed. that would spark some PvP.

[ColonelTEE3]

That is a good point, but guess how big people's stockpiles are going to be by the time the decay is added? Rare materials is a good way to reduce production. I would like to see those rare finds limited to open areas where tribal totems cannot be placed. that would spark some PvP.

I very much agree with that idea. Or maybe totems can go down, but aren't safe from combat and anyone can harvest on that land.

[MrDDT]

Ya good idea.
Have both cant take it over rare resources, and other rare resources which you can control. Would spark open pvp, and contested pvp for controls too.