Some of you are barking up the wrong tree...

[mindtrigger]

While I do not disagree with some of the people, such as crafters, who do not enjoy getting slaughtered, I think we need to get something clear. If you are expecting people to be nice to you out of the goodness of their hearts, forget it. What other players are doing that upsets you is exactly what this game's design allows them to do. You cannot expect anything more or less.

So where does this leave us? Notorious has handed you a game with a set of rules that you are stuck with, at least for now. Are they going for realism? In the real world after a global disaster, no one would care if you were a crafter, a low level noob, or a suckling child. They will kill you and take your stuff. They may even eat you and use your bones for weapons, armor and Lincoln Logs for their own children.

Seems to me there are only two options (or a combination of both):

1) Notorious starts coding in some safety mechanisms to make things easier for players not interested in combat.
2) The game community comes together and figures out a way to deal with this as best they can within the construct of the game play mechanics.

We know that #1 will work, but it will also start restricting the game in ways we may not even understand yet. Some trade off may be ok here, but only testing will tell. #2 is a serious wildcard because basically the only option we have is to "police" each other with our own combat players. This will require a lot of effort, and would likely end up being a gameplay style that would take up most of people's play time. Basically they have to become military or police players that spend all of their time working that aspect of the game.

The bottom line is that complaining about these things isn't going to accomplish anything. Players are not going to play by your version of the rules when the game allows them to do anything they want, more or less. Understand that there is a fairly large chunk of the gaming population that gets off on griefing and being bullies for no other reason than Mommy and Daddy didn't hug them enough. They are the same people who have little sense of values in the real world, or they are cowards who like to e-bully because they have no strength (of any kind) in the real world. They exist, and you have to game with them.

I suspect in the end if Notorious doesn't plan to deal with this through gameplay mechanics, the game will suffer the loss of players who are more interested in community building (crafting, medicine, social, political, etc) and the game will devolve into a PvP-fest until everyone gets sick of it and leaves. Real longevity in a sandbox game relies on a nice balance of everything so that it pulls in a diverse player base. I personally do not believe player policing will work to any degree that will make people happy. It simply requires some to take on a huge responsibility and trade actual game time for a second job.

Thoughts?

** EDIT FOR CLARITY ON THE PVP ISSUE: I am not saying PvP is bad. I enjoy it myself. The people I am ripping on above are the griefers who simply play the way they do to irritate others. You are welcome to disagree, but I think they suck. I also understand that what constitutes 'griefing' is subjective. Those of you who are looking for a PvE only game are in the wrong place.

[mindtrigger]

In addition, I wouldn't even say combat is this game's strong point as it exists today. I'm surprised it's even attracting PvP players, although as mentioned above, some people just like to see what they can get away with, and they don't mind walking on everyone else in the process. That is their choice, as long as they aren't exploiting the game with real cheats (not your moral idea of 'cheats').

[shadowlz]

In the real world after a global disaster, no one would care if you were a crafter, a low level noob, or a suckling child. They will kill you and take your stuff. They may even eat you and use your bones for weapons, armor and Lincoln Logs...

Damn, sounds like reavers! Back to the ship!

[mindtrigger]

Damn, sounds like reavers! Back to the ship!

You aren't in danger of actually contributing to the discussion here...are you?

[kombi]

There may even be tribes out there with a military / mercanary stand point open to offers of supplies for protection...

[MrKrueak]

honestly i'm not worried about it anymore, i can pvp with the best of them just wanted to try something different in a game that is feature as being different so i was planning on going the crafting route, but will go the combat route and give back my contribution in the form of an axe instead of a shovel.

[santoclawz]

i read your thread and considered is seriously until you wrote

"The bottom line is that complaining about these things isn't going to accomplish anything. Players are not going to play by your version of the rules when the game allows them to do anything they want, more or less. Understand that there is a fairly large chunk of the gaming population that gets off on griefing and being bullies for no other reason than Mommy and Daddy didn't hug them enough. They are the same people who have little sense of values in the real world, or they are cowards who like to e-bully because they have no strength (of any kind) in the real world. They exist, and you have to game with them."

I hate when people do that generalize, demonize, and make assumptions about a subgroup of players they do not agree with. I see it in almost every thread i read pvp'rs explaining why they kill who they kill, ive seen good legitimate reasons given and also funny reasons given. I am not an "active" pk'er but i do like to pvp and what all these pve and crafter ONLY people need to realize is 90% of the time people arent pvping to ruin your day.... they do it because its fun to them thats why they play games, which by the way is as good a reason to play a game as crafting or role-playing or whatever reason anyone else plays the game.

What i really dont understand though is why the people who dont like to pvp or pk have such a sense of elitism, they assume anyone who pvp's IN A VIDEO GAME is weak or a child or sucks at life.... I mean really mindtrigger do you honestly believe that people who pvp really didnt get enough hugs as a kid.... that has to be the most ignorant statement i think i have yet to read on these forums, but it is right there with all the people who dont like pvp calling pvpers kids and children.

grow up.

[fflhktsn]

Yup, in a sandbox where the players are given all the tools needed to fight off gankers and griefers, the pve crowd will choose to cry to the developers for saftey mechanism built into the game to do it for them

Honestly i dare the developers to create said saftey mechanisms to chase away the pvp crowd, who needs them right? They just ruin the game for the pve crowd...

How dare we play the game as we see fit and not choose the carebear "i want in game protection i dont want to have to make friends with combat character who have nothing better to do than protect me"

I agree, i think i would just be easyer just to add in arena pvp, mabey some insant battlegrounds, and keep pvp out of the world. worked really well for other games.

They could also drop the sandbox title and switch it to sim/real life.

Im so sick of these suggestions that the awnswer to the "pvp problem" a problem that has NEVER existed in the game, is to creat mechanisms coded into the game to thwart peoples playstyle choice. "Dont force your pvp on me" is the battle cry of the pve crowd, and to do so they want to force pve on us as the only entertaining and viable path.

i digress...perhaps this isnt and shouldnt be a game for us pvp interested folks, there are plenty of actual sandbox pvp games out there right, well mabey 3...in a sea of games with consensual pvp.

so bring on the arnenas and battlegrounds, lets keep pvp from ruining the pve only crowds game. honestly i wouldnt care at this point as long as the game was playable.

[mindtrigger]

Item decay and the ability to loot those killed in PvP are a crafter's best friends, since both create a market for their goods. It's a symbiotic relationship, there are just some people who don't step back enough to see past their own prejudice.

Well, you are welcome to your opinion. I haven't been playing and don't plan to until they announce the final wipe, but judging by the number of posts on this particular topic, I would say it's important. You may not agree, but that doesn't mean there is not a problem that needs to be addressed. As I said above, "community" players will leave, and all that will be left is the PvP group who leaves games as fast as they join them. The thing about sandbox games it that they need a well balanced and fair system to start with in order to pull and keep a nice well rounded player base. The social and communal players (including PvE) are more important that PvP players in this type of game, IMO. PvP bring a great element of excitement and chaos, but they shouldn't be overruning all the other aspects of the game.

[mindtrigger]

i read your thread and considered is seriously until you wrote

"The bottom line is that complaining about these things isn't going to accomplish anything. Players are not going to play by your version of the rules when the game allows them to do anything they want, more or less. Understand that there is a fairly large chunk of the gaming population that gets off on griefing and being bullies for no other reason than Mommy and Daddy didn't hug them enough. They are the same people who have little sense of values in the real world, or they are cowards who like to e-bully because they have no strength (of any kind) in the real world. They exist, and you have to game with them."

I hate when people do that generalize, demonize, and make assumptions about a subgroup of players they do not agree with. I see it in almost every thread i read pvp'rs explaining why they kill who they kill, ive seen good legitimate reasons given and also funny reasons given. I am not an "active" pk'er but i do like to pvp and what all these pve and crafter ONLY people need to realize is 90% of the time people arent pvping to ruin your day.... they do it because its fun to them thats why they play games, which by the way is as good a reason to play a game as crafting or role-playing or whatever reason anyone else plays the game.

What i really dont understand though is why the people who dont like to pvp or pk have such a sense of elitism, they assume anyone who pvp's IN A VIDEO GAME is weak or a child or sucks at life.... I mean really mindtrigger do you honestly believe that people who pvp really didnt get enough hugs as a kid.... that has to be the most ignorant statement i think i have yet to read on these forums, but it is right there with all the people who dont like pvp calling pvpers kids and children.

grow up.

I'm not addressing those people who enjoy good PvP. I'm addressing the ones who like to grief others non-stop. If you couldn't extrapolate that from my post, I'm sorry. I will edit it and make sure it is more clear.

[Malivius]

Damn, sounds like reavers! Back to the ship!

"Let's be bad guys!"

On-topic, there is a huge difference in acceptable PvP and griefing, beginning with every individual's differing definition of "griefing". The game gives people the option to play/roleplay an evil tribe/individual bent on destroying what's left of the world so, as much as others may not approve, those people have a valid place in the game world.

Does that mean I agree with destroying the population by farming spawn points and chasing new players away from the game? (Which shouldn't be an issue after the spawn protection is working correctly.) NO...it's horrible for the game and the community. It took Aventurine way too long to figure out that people logging into DF for the first time didn't really enjoy getting steamrolled and drylooted before they had figured out how to move/work the UI.

I also don't see much point in corpse-camping someone that's already been drylooted just to ruin their evening, but I also cringe at the things that happen on the internet today due to anonymity...

The game seems (at this point) to have a healthy population of both PvE and PvP (and combo) players. The dev team also seems to have a good idea of how to take care of some of the stuff that needs a system in place (to protect 30 second-old players from leetsauce asshats with nothing better to do), which will help immensely.

I look forward to crafting, exploring, building, and yes, fighting, but I play/roleplay a good character..which will get me killed more often than it will benefit me I think. Should be interesting!

[ifireallymust]

OP, as one mud-hut dwelling misanthrope to another: It's not quite as bad as you make it out to be. How do I know? Because I'm typing this instead of going out into the night looking for someone to rob and kill. Humans evolved as selfish, vicious, and dangerous creatures. I would be the last to argue it. But we also evolved to cooperate and interact in less overtly violent ways, and sometimes in ways that aren't violent at all. The proof of a cooperative, creative, and even generous side of humanity is all around us.

Now the misanthrope's guild will want their membership card back. I hope they at least let me keep the mud-hut. I'd just gotten it decorated exactly how I wanted it!

[orious13]

I'll make the Xsyon Police Tribe....
....after I finish making myself leet. hah.
....after I build my keep. hah.
....after I get my crafting to max. hah.
....after I've found every junk pile and terraformed them. hah.

The above is the only problem. People will definitely be willing to police, but they will have more important things to do when the game kicks off. After safe zones leave the ability for the community to "police" might be ready... maybe.

[ifireallymust]

I'll make the Xsyon Police Tribe....
....after I finish making myself leet. hah.
....after I build my keep. hah.
....after I get my crafting to max. hah.
....after I've found every junk pile and terraformed them. hah.

The above is the only problem. People will definitely be willing to police, but they will have more important things to do when the game kicks off. After safe zones leave the ability for the community to "police" might be ready... maybe.

Good point.

[fflhktsn]

I'll make the Xsyon Police Tribe....
....after I finish making myself leet. hah.
....after I build my keep. hah.
....after I get my crafting to max. hah.
....after I've found every junk pile and terraformed them. hah.

The above is the only problem. People will definitely be willing to police, but they will have more important things to do when the game kicks off. After safe zones leave the ability for the community to "police" might be ready... maybe.

My hope is that they dont code in protection mechanisms that remove this need, if they do the last task on that list wont be protecting people, it will be finding another game.

All i want, is that the world remain usafe, no protections (ill cave on noob protection for a short time), and no "only for evil" death penalties. Do this and the pvp crowd will be spread out thin, occupied with protecting their tribes crafters, and the small percentage of gank to harass players will have more than enough combat characters to deal with. It actually benefits the pve crowd despite i get flamed for even suggesting a rule free world as such.

[mrcalhou]

People see games like Darkfall and Mortal Online that have pretty much unmitigated PvP and freak out that this game will be like that too. I've never been a fan of FFA-PvP, but I do think that having the ability to control territory through action will make the gameplay more emergent and increase the game's longevity. There's nothing wrong with having safe zones in this type of game. There's nothing wrong with cathering to the PvP crowd and the PvE crowd at the same time. PvP players just don't need the entire map to gank people, nor do PvE players need the entire map to make junk angels in their junk piles.

Personally I'd prefer to spend most of my time in the safe zones, but I'd still like the option to venture out into the more "dangerous" areas if that meant getting a better reward.

The game just needs to be balanced. Risk vs. Reward.

[Lucinda]

How about giving those that focus on crafting some viable tools to defend themselves? It doesn't have to be the best of both worlds, but it seems to me that right now a crafter is no match for a combat oriented player. If the crafter route gave you some more honed combat skills on the side, just enough to at least put up a fight or a chance to escape.

How about traps? If crafting is their forte, then making a few effective traps shouldn't be a big whoop, and it would make it harder for the combatants to score a kill if they are at risk of getting snared while attacking a defenseless crafter busy doing something else.

I don't know, I am just throwing ideas out, I am still trying to figure out how to make anything other than grass string..

[fflhktsn]

How about giving those that focus on crafting some viable tools to defend themselves? It doesn't have to be the best of both worlds, but it seems to me that right now a crafter is no match for a combat oriented player. If the crafter route gave you some more honed combat skills on the side, just enough to at least put up a fight or a chance to escape.

How about traps? If crafting is their forte, then making a few effective traps shouldn't be a big whoop, and it would make it harder for the combatants to score a kill if they are at risk of getting snared while attacking a defenseless crafter busy doing something else.

I don't know, I am just throwing ideas out, I am still trying to figure out how to make anything other than grass string..

Sorry...your tools to defend yourself are combat character in your tribe. we dont want a darkfall where the best fighters are the best crafter now do we?

[Lucinda]

Sorry...your tools to defend yourself are combat character in your tribe. we dont want a darkfall where the best fighters are the best crafter now do we?
No need to be sorry, I haven't yet played nearly enough to know any better :)

[mindtrigger]

People see games like Darkfall and Mortal Online that have pretty much unmitigated PvP and freak out that this game will be like that too. I've never been a fan of FFA-PvP, but I do think that having the ability to control territory through action will make the gameplay more emergent and increase the game's longevity. There's nothing wrong with having safe zones in this type of game. There's nothing wrong with cathering to the PvP crowd and the PvE crowd at the same time. PvP players just don't need the entire map to gank people, nor do PvE players need the entire map to make junk angels in their junk piles.

Personally I'd prefer to spend most of my time in the safe zones, but I'd still like the option to venture out into the more "dangerous" areas if that meant getting a better reward.

The game just needs to be balanced. Risk vs. Reward.

THIS is what I am talking about. Let the player decide how they want to play the game. It is a game after all. There is no reason we can't dedicate part of the land as safe zones. What you are accomplishing with such a gameplay mechanic is a simulation of policing. In the case of safe areas, the policing is an invisible assumption. Why not? Those of us who want to live on the dangerous side can live in open PvP areas. You probably don't even need it to be a 50/50 split. I bet 25% or less of the land area designated as safe would be fine. Just a thought.

[fflhktsn]

THIS is what I am talking about. Let the player decide how they want to play the game. It is a game after all. There is no reason we can't dedicate of the land as safe zones. What you are accomplishing with such a gameplay mechanic is a simulation of policing. In the case of safe areas, the policing is an invisible assumption. Why not? Those of us who want to live on the dangerous side can live in those areas. You probably don't even need it to be a 50/50 split. I bet 25% or less of the land area designated as safe would be fine. Just a thought.

Yes but you notice how he said he would prefer to spend most of his time in a safe zone....this nullifies the need for any combat character needed to protect

[fflhktsn]

Bottom line to every thread like this:

PVE Crowd: We want protections, penalties for pvpers, and to have no use or need for combat characters. pvp playstlye choice must be punished.

PVP crowd: we want a use for our combat characters, use us to protect you, we have nothing else to do. remove safezones, no penalties, give us a chance to help you!

[MrKrueak]

Bottom line to every thread like this:

PVE Crowd: We want protections, penalties for pvpers, and to have no use or need for combat characters

PVP crowd: we want a use for our combat characters, use us to protect you, we have nothing else to do. remove safezones, no penalties, give us a chance to help you!

it may be the bottom line by the time the thread is fleshed out but it usually starts off as some type of a compromise suggestion and those of us, you and i included that turns the whole thread into what you describe.

[mindtrigger]

Are you sure you meant to quote me? I, in no way, said it was not important.

This is a classic case of over-exaggeration and misinformation. It's like watching Fox News. (THIS JUST IN! THE WATER YOU DRINK COULD CAUSE DAIN BRAMAGE!) You have made the incorrect assertion that pvp players are not social or communal. PvP players are, in my experience, very social and communal....or they fail.

I suppose next you'll ask for a flag to PvE so that raccoons don't kill you while scavenging?

No, you are making the assumption that I am lumping ALL PvP players together, and I am not. However it only takes a small number of persistant PvP campers, griefers and whatnot to ruin the game in my opinion. As noted previously, I enjoy PvP, and I have no problem with wars, organized attacks, or even the occasional murder of an unsuspecting crafter skipping through the woods with his basket of flowers.

[fflhktsn]

it may be the bottom line by the time the thread is fleshed out but it usually starts off as some type of a compromise suggestion and those of us, you and i included that turns the whole thread into what you describe.

your post count is low so i figured you missed the last 1000 posts regarding this subject. No compromise is ever reached, a compromise would be conensual pvp, wich removed my previously stated need for a combat character as protection ala sandbox solution.

ive been labeld as one of those mentally disturbed pvpers who like to set small children on fire while tossing up kittins and whacking them with a fungo bat types for merely suggesting that pve'er use combat characters for all the protections they need.

seeing as were most likely going to have another night of no game, get ready for the flamewars to ensue.

[mrcalhou]

Bottom line to every thread like this:

PVE Crowd: We want protections, penalties for pvpers, and to have no use or need for combat characters. pvp playstlye choice must be punished.

PVP crowd: we want a use for our combat characters, use us to protect you, we have nothing else to do. remove safezones, no penalties, give us a chance to help you!

Well... I'm a PvE'er with a leaning towards PvP. In essence I believe that safe zones are okay, as long as they are able to be moderated so that tribes and individuals can't claim large swaths of territory anywhere they like. On the other hand, I also think that fighting over territory would be beneficial to the game. Not only do I think that both playstyles can be accomodated, I also think that both playstyles could support one another. They don't have to be at odds. There is a game on the market that is very successful and uses a hybrid PvP/PvE model. They just made sure that they balanced it. That's the big thing. It just needs to be balanced. But so few people seem to understand that. It's really saddening.

[fflhktsn]

Well... I'm a PvE'er with a leaning towards PvP. In essence I believe that safe zones are okay, as long as they are able to be moderated so that tribes and individuals can't claim large swaths of territory anywhere they like. On the other hand, I also think that fighting over territory would be beneficial to the game. Not only do I think that both playstyles can be accomodated, I also think that both playstyles could support one another. They don't have to be at odds. There is a game on the market that is very successful and uses a hybrid PvP/PvE model. They just made sure that they balanced it. That's the big thing. It just needs to be balanced. But so few people seem to understand that. It's really saddening.

Safe zones are not ok, it removes the need for combat characters, thus removing the balance. Your tribe wont need to have combat for protection, and it will concentrate pvpers outside of the safezones. Im talking static eve style safe zones here. The current setup of mobil safezones will be abused once we go live, and if not removed will be abused during tribal warfare as well.

Lets condition everyone to play by the same rules, by starting off with a balanced game that requires both crafter and combat to succeed.

[Hefe18]

Why is there all this complaining about griefing? Guess what, its really not hard to get away from being ganked over and over. Ever try to spawn at a new starting location? Maybe sprint as soon as you log in till you run out of energy?

I don't grief or support it but damn I feel like it should only take a couple deaths to figure out, hmmm maybe I should try something different.

Also get a friend to help. Wait whats that? you're playing solo? Playing solo is going to be harder in an MMO, sounds like you may want to try a single player game or some other game that only caters to PvE only.

The idea and risk of PvP is what is great in games. I love it and I've barely even come across any so far playing that I don't even know how so many are complaining about it already.

If you can't even ask for help to have someone protect you, which is something I'd probably do, then why even play an online game? Trying to turn this game into your own personal crafting sandbox as if no one else exists is silly.

As a last note to my rant, why is dying bad in this game atm? Set permissions to your packs so they cant be looted and all you lose is whats on your person. Lucky for you even if you had crafted awesome stuff that was just looted, YOU LOVE CRAFTING, MAKE MORE, what else were you planning to do in the game?

[orious13]

Bottom line to every thread like this:

PVE Crowd: We want protections, penalties for pvpers, and to have no use or need for combat characters. pvp playstlye choice must be punished.

PVP crowd: we want a use for our combat characters, use us to protect you, we have nothing else to do. remove safezones, no penalties, give us a chance to help you!


There are many reasons to be a combat character... Obviously way less reasons than a crafter at the moment. Your only reason to be one is pretty much to protect crafters? If that's your entire reason for a game to have them then that game already has problems..

However the "PvE" crowd just wants their safezones for prelude at the least.

The "PvP" crowd primarily wants to be able to kill anywhere any time. It really doesn't have much to do with reason because there isn't a reason to attack a crafter without anything to give or make except crappy starter tools. Not saying you need a reason. Just saying there isn't a reason to be combat speced is wrong.

[MrKrueak]

Im talking static eve style safe zones here. .

you keep referring to static eve style safe zones? just fyi they are not safe but high security, there are still non consensual pvp that happens in this high security space, corporations can declare war on any other player corporation ingame and the one being wardecced has no choice in the matter. It is also possible to gank in this high security space one is simply a suicide attack but the most common is baiting the solo players using game mechanics to instantly flag themselves as being the aggressor and allowing you to attack at will. so before you knock a games mechanics you need to understand them first.

I am not saying this system needs to be placed here in xyson, just wanted to point that out before you say i do.

[mindtrigger]

your post count is low so i figured you missed the last 1000 posts regarding this subject. No compromise is ever reached, a compromise would be conensual pvp, wich removed my previously stated need for a combat character as protection ala sandbox solution.

ive been labeld as one of those mentally disturbed pvpers who like to set small children on fire while tossing up kittins and whacking them with a fungo bat types for merely suggesting that pve'er use combat characters for all the protections they need.

seeing as were most likely going to have another night of no game, get ready for the flamewars to ensue.

I think you are a little nuts if you think PvP players, even in tribes, are going to spend all of their game time protecting non-pvp players so they can go do their business outside of their tribal area. Not only will there almost always be a shortage of people wanting to do that job, but the ones who do likely won't do it for long because it will be boring most of the time. As I said in the OP, policing areas will be a huge responsibility that will feel like a second job.

I did like the idea someone had of crafters being able to set traps, at least ones that might let them have a shot at fleeing.

Look you don't have to agree with me, and maybe the griefer problem is being exaggerated currently, but what you and I agree on is irrelevent. If the game isn't fun for PvE and community players such as crafters, they will leave, and those remaining can PvP each other until your eyes bleed. If the PvE and community player leave, this game will die.

I hope there really isn't a problem, but we might as well start looking at it now to see if we can suggest some solutions. As an indie game, Xsyon already has the cards stacked against it. I understand the romantic notion of a completely open sandbox game, but that isn't even what PvPers want. If they did, they would be ok with crafters being able to do combat too.

In Real Life, I am a Wing Chun practitioner who is an IT Pro and computer programmer. I also build cars and 4x4's for fun, as well as read books about trippy subjects and I like to target shoot with guns. If we want to have an open game here, then perhaps crafters, given enough time, should be able to do full combat as well.

[fflhktsn]

There are many reasons to be a combat character... Obviously way less reasons than a crafter at the moment. Your only reason to be one is pretty much to protect crafters? If that's your entire reason for a game to have them then that game already has problems..

However the "PvE" crowd just wants their safezones for prelude at the least.

The "PvP" crowd primarily wants to be able to kill anywhere any time. It really doesn't have much to do with reason because there isn't a reason to attack a crafter without anything to give or make except crappy starter tools.

no no no...but there should be a dependance on combat characters to protect the defenseless crafters.

for all the cries about ganking, you would think i would see more combats standing at the junk piles waiting for me...but i dont...there is an easy solution to the pve crowds worries standing right in front of them, they ignore it and want protection programmed in.

also, without people like you and me, who will be doing the opposite of policing, there is no need to police. balance.

[Doc]

no no no...but there should be a dependance on combat characters to protect the defenseless crafters.

for all the cries about ganking, you would think i would see more combats standing at the junk piles waiting for me...but i dont...there is an easy solution to the pve crowds worries standing right in front of them, they ignore it and want protection programmed in.

Your solution has been tested and failed, and in devs we trust. Cyas.

[fflhktsn]

Your solution has been tested and failed, and in devs we trust. Cyas.

the developers tested no safe zones and it failed? bullshit.

[mindtrigger]

What's funny is that the devs recognize pvp and the danger of leaving your safezone as a cornerstone of the game.

A balance of sorts must be struck. If not, people will leave.

One of the reasons themepark games get boring so fast is because there is no community. Attracting people who want to do combat is a no-brainer. The people you REALLY want to attract and keep are the other kinds of players. The community players who want to build a society within the game, not just look at everything through the lense of combat. SWG, despite being a broken, buggy game almost deviod of content was revered by the players because it had features and gameplay for the non-combat players that was as deep as the combat aspect. It attracted people who wouldn't otherwise have ever played an MMO game, and because of this the world came alive like I have not seen in any game since. The PLAYERS were the content, and it was awesome. I was surprised to find that I would actually enjoy the crafting and social features of MMOs more than the combat, especially since I played FPS games online since 1995.

[Azer]

Damn, sounds like reavers! Back to the ship!

LOL ...' and if we are very lucky, they will do it in that order....' - Xoe... My favorite line in Firefly.

[Doc]

What's funny is that the devs recognize pvp and the danger of leaving your safezone as a cornerstone of the game.

Yah, and safe zones as another cornerstone of the game. Everyone gets what they want. Simple. Now if you would be so kind to explain it to ffhktsn?

[mindtrigger]

Again...you say that you like pvp, but continually generalize pvpers as non-community builders.

You seem to read comments as black and white. I'm not sure if you are trolling, or you really can't have a thought that gets into the more dynamic aspects of this conversation. When was the last time you played a Themepark game full of combat players that had a rich community? I have played most of the games to come out, and I haven't seen anything like the community of SWG emerge since. This is mainly because the gameplay mechanics of most games to not take into account that there are a lot of people out there who would like to contribute to such a game, and they couldn't care less about combat.

In a nutshell, I don't think making combat the cornerstone of this game is the best of ideas.

[mindtrigger]

You're going to be dispoint when tribal warfare goes in.

Nah. If there is a balanced community and game play that respects most play styles, I'll stick around. If not, I will move on. No big deal.

[tilla]

tommybomb: while Tribal Warfare will be a cool feature and one that a lot of people enjoy, it has in no way been implied or stated by the devs that it will be the only playstyle after prelude. We'll just have proper ways to remain safe after prelude rather than the current safezone method. Crafting and the like will always be a huge part of the game, with new technologies discovered that unlock whole other branches of crafting, like mining for new resources and agriculture when the scrap heaps run out - not to mention the healers when that's implemented.

[fflhktsn]

I guess you're right. After all, you're in Hopi and have a direct line to the devs.

+++

[zettoz]

I guess you're right. After all, you're in Hopi and have a direct line to the devs.

+1 Internet

[zymurgeist]

the developers tested no safe zones and it failed? bullshit.

It's been tested in a dozen games. Everything from non-existant to extensive safe zones with varying forms of protection. If you really want to know something about the topic go back to the original laboratory, Ultima Online. Trammel didn't happen because players protected each other so well in Felucca. It happened because it's tiresome to be on your guard every second and people quit logging in. I'm no fan of the easily abused mechanism of safe zones but there are definite times when you need them.

[Zenmaster13]

I guess you're right. After all, you're in Hopi and have a direct line to the devs.

What I want to know, is are all you griefing weaklings going to use this ridiculous excuse for everything that goes wrong for you in this game? Oh my I fell off the mountain, it must be because the devs love Hopi. Oh my, I was killed by a player fairly, must be because the devs love Hopi, etc. Grow up please

[Dontaze_Mebro]

It's been tested in a dozen games. Everything from non-existant to extensive safe zones with varying forms of protection. If you really want to know something about the topic go back to the original laboratory, Ultima Online. Trammel didn't happen because players protected each other so well in Felucca. It happened because it's tiresome to be on your guard every second and people quit logging in. I'm no fan of the easily abused mechanism of safe zones but there are definite times when you need them.
Remind me what happened to the subscription numbers after Trammel? Oh ya drastic decline. THat's right....

[mrcalhou]

Remind me what happened to the subscription numbers after Trammel? Oh ya drastic decline. THat's right....

The subscription decline because of Trammel happened because it changed the game too much in an already established game. Eve online has safe zones and non safe zones and they're doing just fine.

[jokhul]

Remind me what happened to the subscription numbers after Trammel? Oh ya drastic decline. THat's right....

Yes, the population on the FFA-PVP server sank like a stone, yet strangely the population of the newly created safezone server rocketed, even exceeding the highest number ever reached on the FFA-PVP server !

Yup, the playerbase voted with their feet. They fled to carebear land, lmao.

Is there a lesson to be learned from that ? Who knows ;)

[STAR_GOD]

I guess you're right. After all, you're in Hopi and have a direct line to the devs.

+++++

[Zenmaster13]

+++++

Ahh the good old blame Hopi defense. Pathetic

[Tehroth]

The way the game is going to be is FFA loot with tribal areas being safe zones until prelude is over(Which I agree with, we need a foundation for the game). After the prelude is the tribal conquest campaigning where tribes can lay siege with no safe zones. Red players will be able to be raided before prelude and kill inside their tribe.

At least this is the way I interpreted Jordi's ideas and I hope that is how the game is. Initially I wanted no safe zones FFA pvp right off the bat, but with all these griefer coming into the game they will ruin the balance of wolves and sheep. We need crafters to be relatively safe so they can construct the foundations of the game, although I am sure everyone will have to craft, but more than others.


It's been tested in a dozen games. Everything from non-existant to extensive safe zones with varying forms of protection. If you really want to know something about the topic go back to the original laboratory, Ultima Online. Trammel didn't happen because players protected each other so well in Felucca. It happened because it's tiresome to be on your guard every second and people quit logging in. I'm no fan of the easily abused mechanism of safe zones but there are definite times when you need them.

Lol that hardly is the reason. Darkfall although it had npc cities that could be war dec'd in was fun as hell. It adds more thrill to the game. Being in murder herd we were always targeted. Eventually you learn to cope with the feeling of being on alert all the time. Although Darkfall is way bigger than this game id go afk mining and the such. What I am afraid of in this game though is the multi guild zerg alliances.

[bruisie159]

Safe zones are not ok, it removes the need for combat characters, thus removing the balance. Your tribe wont need to have combat for protection, and it will concentrate pvpers outside of the safezones. Im talking static eve style safe zones here. The current setup of mobil safezones will be abused once we go live, and if not removed will be abused during tribal warfare as well.

Lets condition everyone to play by the same rules, by starting off with a balanced game that requires both crafter and combat to succeed.

It never did swg any harm. It never did eve any harm. Even df has safe zones. Your constant all or nOthing mantra claiming safe zones = game will obviously fail is based on no evidence whatsoever. There will be plenty of pvp to be had in xsyon if you want it without the need to force everyone to play the way you want to.

[Raizure]

It never did swg any harm. It never did eve any harm. Even df has safe zones. Your constant all or nOthing mantra claiming safe zones = game will obviously fail is based on no evidence whatsoever. There will be plenty of pvp to be had in xsyon if you want it without the need to force everyone to play the way you want to.

what you fail to realize is that Xyson at this time has TOO MANY SAFE ZONES. I'm all for spawn safe zones and the like so people can get adjusted, but every tribe and their grandmothers shouldn't be safe zoned. In fact, i think that the game will naturally develop safezones if the community is left to do just that. Coalitions between tribes will be able to hunt down pkers and ensure safety in their area. Cities would be able to quickly kill gankers within their borders and be safe havens for newbies. This is the way he game should be. Now i know that safe zones are necessary for those cities and coalitions to develop, which is why i think they should exist VERY temporarily, otherwse people become too adjusted to them and refuse to allow the game to become what it's meant to be.

[bruisie159]

what you fail to realize is that Xyson at this time has TOO MANY SAFE ZONES. I'm all for spawn safe zones and the like so people can get adjusted, but every tribe and their grandmothers shouldn't be safe zoned. In fact, i think that the game will naturally develop safezones if the community is left to do just that. Coalitions between tribes will be able to hunt down pkers and ensure safety in their area. Cities would be able to quickly kill gankers within their borders and be safe havens for newbies. This is the way he game should be. Now i know that safe zones are necessary for those cities and coalitions to develop, which is why i think they should exist VERY temporarily, otherwse people become too adjusted to them and refuse to allow the game to become
what it's meant to be.

I would agree with u if every tribe zone was safe for everyone and I'd be against alliance safe zones but as it is an individuals safe zone is actually pretty small compared to the size of the world especially homesteads. The situation is often greatly exaggerated by claiming the world is half safe or whatever cos it's not. Now, in eve it is and that's a very pvp orientated game.

There is no way xsyon will fail if safe zone rules stay if they are now it's only the extremists that may leave but where they would go I've no idea.

[Bisjul]

Trammel left a pretty deep gash -

Remember all the cool player-made (and Dev assisted) content that created prior to the splitting of the shards?

Completely wasted.

Why play in Feluca, if you can just live forever in Trammel?

Opinion: There are lessons to be learned in a game that lacks the omnipresence of SAFETY.

[Doc]

what you fail to realize is that Xyson at this time has TOO MANY SAFE ZONES. I'm all for spawn safe zones and the like so people can get adjusted, but every tribe and their grandmothers shouldn't be safe zoned.

Tribe member is safe only on tribe area, which is dependant on number of people in tribe. Soloer is safe only on small patch of land around his totem. No, theres not too many safe zones, cause for certain player, safe zone is tiny piece of land.


In fact, i think that the game will naturally develop safezones if the community is left to do just that. Coalitions between tribes will be able to hunt down pkers and ensure safety in their area. Cities would be able to quickly kill gankers within their borders and be safe havens for newbies. This is the way he game should be.

Yah, it should be like that, but it never worked out, and game is not ready for dealing with it.


Now i know that safe zones are necessary for those cities and coalitions to develop, which is why i think they should exist VERY temporarily, otherwse people become too adjusted to them and refuse to allow the game to become what it's meant to be.

They should stay as long as necessary, it doesnt matter if "safe zone" is magical circle on the ground or stone walls, but since we dont have fully funtional fort desing that will act as "hard" safe zone, we are stuck with "soft" one.

[bruisie159]

Trammel left a pretty deep gash -

Remember all the cool player-made (and Dev assisted) content that created prior to the splitting of the shards?

Completely wasted.

Why play in Feluca, if you can just live forever in Trammel?

Opinion: There are lessons to be learned in a game that lacks the omnipresence of SAFETY.

Completly differerent situation you're talking about complete pvp or complete pve. Thats not xsyon, Xsyon has (just a guess) 99% land area FFA Full Loot PVP. Is that not enough?

[AndyI]

This may not be popular but it's meant to be thought provoking.

People on both sides of the argument are making this about the other side and it's not. If I had a pound for everytime a PVP'er didn't like what someone said and called them a carebear and worse, I'd be very rich. Likewise, people moaning about being ganked. All very pathetic and childish.

The problem is a little more basic than that. It is simply a fact that PVP games attract a lot of very undesirable people (nothing wrong with most pvp players) and you only have to read thread after thread on these forums or the IRC chat to see how rude, obnoxious, childish and pathetic some people are and thier sole fun is ruining someone elses day be it trolling on a forum or ganking people without any regard for what the game is actually about and playing it accordingly i.e by all means play as a PVP tribe, these would exist in real life and kill anyone passing by because your goal is to loot the things you need or eat the person if food was scarce. The problem wont be these tribes, it will be many of the small minded pathetic people whose goal is getting online and just having fun causing grief.

PVP'ers and those wanting a more in depth experience than simply PVP have a happy medium already with tribe land and homesteads. If anyone seriously thinks this is too much 'safe' land then they are deluded. You will have to travel to gather resources and you will probably need protection or go in groups or live somewhere quiet and this is fine and I suspect most will agree with that. PVP'ers arguing for no safe zones really need to think about this a little more because you're arguing against the wrong people and it seems rather pathetic that it always comes down to this when actually the only people stirring up the nonsense are those not really interested in the game but out to just have fun spoiling. I for one am sick and tired of the the minority of childish, rude, obnoxious people that these games attract and the stupid bloody arguments about PVP'ing or carebears.

You simply cannot have no safe zones because unlike RL people are not online all of the time and therefore cannot protect their property. There will be times when nobody from a tribe will be online. The game would descend into being about tribe vs tribe wars and everything else will take a back seat.

Many people should just grow up and apply a little more common sense and realise that if we all deal with the griefers and accept PVP in the spirit in which the era of which the game represents then we'd all just get along fine. I read IRC and global chat in game and think to myself what on earth some of these people do for a living or how old or intelligent they are because there are an awful lot of brave people behind computers who betray their levels of intelligence, common sense and social skills. Some people really need to take a long hard look in the mirror.

PVP is fine, safe zones are fine. Safe zones are tiny in the grand scheme of things. Nobody wants to play a game where you have lots of silly children just trying to have fun at everyones expense and then smack talking in the chat. If everyone wants this game to succeed and be great then it is in nobodys interest to let the extremes on either side of this artifical argument change anything. Quite simply I think the devs have got the balance correct and I hope that griefing will be looked at on a case by case basis and not let ruin the concept and atmosphere of the game. If that's the case then there is no argument to be had about PVP in game or safe zones imo and some people need to get over themselves sooner rather than later.

[zymurgeist]

Remind me what happened to the subscription numbers after Trammel? Oh ya drastic decline. THat's right....

Nothing like the population decline before Trammel and after Age of Shadows and felucca became a veritable ghost town. What does that tell you? It's a tragedy that PvP people rarely see what kills their games in the proper light.

[mrcalhou]

The percentage of land area doesn't mean anything to me when players can place their safe area anywhere they want that isn't already someone else's safe area. Something about that just screams "easily abused." Now, if tribes and people were restricted in the future to only being able to put safe zones in areas that have common resources and common mobs, then I'd have no problem with that either. As a PvE player, I'd like that to be a pretty sizable junk of the map, but I still think the PvP should get their High Risk/High Reward zones. This way, they can come sell the stuff I won't bother to go out and get, and in return I'll be able to trade them goods that I created at reasonable rate since I don't have to worry about getting ganked all the time and then driving my prices up to compensate.

It promotes balance and trade.

[AndyI]

You could just restrict tribal lands to land that has no rare resources or scrap heaps on it then people have to leave the tribal land. Either way, people will have to venture into PVP zones. They do now. How long does anyone seriously think resources will last on tribal land such as trees etc? Not very long. So what's the issue? Seems to be an argument about nothing to me.

[Sultan]

Why would you want to put things in the game to stop some one from attaking any one

I well tell you a simple way have pvpers in your tribe also!!!

there is no pvper that can live without a pver in this game!!

[Jadzia]

Very wise words, AndyI.

[zymurgeist]

The percentage of land area doesn't mean anything to me when players can place their safe area anywhere they want that isn't already someone else's safe area. Something about that just screams "easily abused." Now, if tribes and people were restricted in the future to only being able to put safe zones in areas that have common resources and common mobs, then I'd have no problem with that either. As a PvE player, I'd like that to be a pretty sizable junk of the map, but I still think the PvP should get their High Risk/High Reward zones. This way, they can come sell the stuff I won't bother to go out and get, and in return I'll be able to trade them goods that I created at reasonable rate since I don't have to worry about getting ganked all the time and then driving my prices up to compensate.

It promotes balance and trade.

It's a balancing act but yes. There also needs to be a war system to add metagame. The best spots should be fought over not granted in perpetuity by default. Otherwise the only recourse is to grief the holders out of the game and that is a very very bad thing.

[Doc]

It's a balancing act but yes. There also needs to be a war system too add metagame. The best spots should be fought over not granted in perpetuity by default.

Thats the most probable way the game will take. Happy times.

[Haphazard]

Honestly the big issue here is that it is just too easy to "gank" someone who doesnt want to fight. With only 1 or 2 well placed shots, the player is dead and his body is looted. The crafter does not have time to defend himself, re-equip his weapon, etc before he is already dead. One of the reasons why EVE works as well as it does, is that it takes time and effort to catch a person who doesnt want to be caught. My recommendation is to make disengaging a bit easier for the player who doesnt want to fight, and force the "ganker" to make some serious preparations to get a good gank - i.e. setting a trap, or carefully waiting for a person to be low on energy or whatever.

hopefully with the combat system overhaul, it will add a bit of complexity to the combat and extending it out a bit, so that the gankee has a chance to survive long enough to either sprint away or until some of his friends can get there to save him.

[bruisie159]

Honestly the big issue here is that it is just too easy to "gank" someone who doesnt want to fight. With only 1 or 2 well placed shots, the player is dead and his body is looted. The crafter does not have time to defend himself, re-equip his weapon, etc before he is already dead. One of the reasons why EVE works as well as it does, is that it takes time and effort to catch a person who doesnt want to be caught. My recommendation is to make disengaging a bit easier for the player who doesnt want to fight, and force the "ganker" to make some serious preparations to get a good gank - i.e. setting a trap, or carefully waiting for a person to be low on energy or whatever.

hopefully with the combat system overhaul, it will add a bit of complexity to the combat and extending it out a bit, so that the gankee has a chance to survive long enough to either sprint away or until some of his friends can get there to save him.

Tbh if the crafter is thinking about what they;re doing it should be possible to just run away from most fights even now. Just make sure you practice running around the tribe zone to keep running skill up!

[Twosock]

I wonder how many that acctually read the features and the about his plans with this game.

Linking it here just incase.

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/32-Conflict-Death-Consequences-and-Decisions?p=223&viewfull=1#post223