Ok, can we just put this to bed now?

[bruisie159]

Quote from 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

My comment from that particular thread:

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!

[ifireallymust]

This particular carebear was trying to compromise. Go figure, the people who made the game already had a better idea than anything I could come up with. Sheesh, what are they not paying me for around here?

Oh.

[bruisie159]

Oh and well done to the dev team for getting a definative answer out when u noticed confusion on the forums!

[Niburu]

So only tribes which allows PVP can have more totems ?

[KeithStone]

No.

What isn't mentioned is how siege mechanics will work ;) have fun pal.

have you seen this from the features list?

"Combat permissions in tribe zones based on tribal settings"

I just noticed it myself.

[bruisie159]

So only tribes which allows PVP can have more totems ?

dont think thats been announced or discussed but it seems fair to me

if you want to expand into new areas then u have to pvp flag - seems like a compromise.

[Niburu]

dont think thats been announced or discussed but it seems fair to me

I saw lots of threads about the conquest system or what not so i though there is an Dev update i missed

[Dweetybyrd]

Keep initial areas safe zones. Once tribes expand to new locations,its on, no safe zones. That simple.

[Atreyu]

And for tribes with safe zones, i think there should be some sort of "timer" where the safe zone doesnt apply if you have recently attacked another player. Simply to prevent you just starting fights, then running onto your tribe land and turning around, suddenly transformed into an unkillable human!

[Baldur]

I'm sorry, but this is a complete joke. Giving tribes the option to either make their land vulnerable to attack or not... I wonder what 99% of tribes will choose? Walls and defensive structures, all just fluff now.

Saying that some players can choose to play realistically, and others not, is ridiculous. In fact, that shafts the players who favour realism, because what's realistic about this system that's proposed?

[bruisie159]

And for tribes with safe zones, i think there should be some sort of "timer" where the safe zone doesnt apply if you have recently attacked another player. Simply to prevent you just starting fights, then running onto your tribe land and turning around, suddenly transformed into an unkillable human!

yeah a sensible idea - not trying to change the nature of the game itself but a suggestion to improve upon a feature that has been confirmed as being in the plans for the future thats what we should be discussing imo.

[Tom316]

If I'm not mistaking (theres been alot of posting and talking ingame from the devs). But the intention has been and will be that expansion totems will always be in an pvp enabled state. Only the main Tribe totems for the Tribe can be flagged as being safe or pvp enabled.

I do agree that some testing and consideration will have to be taken into account for tribes that enable no pvp safe area and then run out and attack people. But it could just be a matter of not trying to fight no pvp enabled tribes close to there tribe area.

Like I have stated from the very start this game is first and foremost about World Building and Crafting with PVP being an addition that does not interfere with the first two unless the player / tribe chooses it to.

[bruisie159]

If I'm not mistaking (theres been alot of posting and talking ingame from the devs). But the intention has been and will be that expansion totems will always be in an pvp enabled state. Only the main Tribe totems for the Tribe can be flagged as being safe or pvp enabled.
.

This ^ as ive been saying all day, its about compromise.

[Niburu]

Tbh for me as PvPer it sounds fair that the main tribal area can be a safe zone so other playstyles can "live". But after all ressources are gathered don't you think its much better to have an expanded area with more ressources which also means PVP. Also we have no NPC cities and towns can be flagged as starter area which needs some form of safety