A Terribly Broken Game Feature

[Chevron]

Just to make myself "Clear" this is NOT a thread about how there should or or should Not be SafeZones in the game.

This thread is about a broken game mechanic within the SafeZones.

I tested this in three diffrent tribe lands to be sure and found that if i walk on a tribes land they can attack me "Without" me provoking them or taking resources and yet they remain completly "INVULNRABLE" to my attacks so there is no self defense.

If this is the way it is supposed to be then it is an appaling game mechanic as the attacking party should at least become flagged to you so you may defend yourself.

Now i realise Fanboy trolls will say "Well then don't walk on a tribes land" but quite honestly how can you take away somones ability to defend themselves if they choose to run through somones land to cut off a 5-10 min walk around or more. I see plenty of tribes set up shop in valleys that will take a person even 20 mins to find a walk around.

I don't mind at all that somone can attack me for simply walking through their land but i should be able to defend myself.

This game mechanic needs serious discussion.

We need to hear the Devs come forward and justify Allowing someone to attack and loot you without provacation other then walking through their land while remaining completly invulnrable. I think we should receive a list of details explaining why this is being implemented as well as why no other alternatives will work.

Thoughts and opinions please.

[Dweetybyrd]

/agree 100%

[Chavoda]

Works fine as it is. or it would mean that anyone could just steal resources just to lure folks into hitting them and thus flagging them.
or by waiting outside tribe l;and untill some folks start gathering and then hit provoke flagging enabling them to attack tho folks on tribe land.

Plenty of reason to keep it as it is, else you can just as well remove all save zones. perhaps whit the combat review it can change to a more adv flagging system but for now its fine. traveled around quite a bit and this is not a problem, just say away of tribes if you carry something wroth it for now.

[Chevron]

/agree 100%

This current broken mechanic deters people from exploring and deters community building as again...why meet somone to trade or walk into a tribes city when they have complete invulnrability and can murder you for simply being on their land with out you being able to fight back.

Again im all for people being able to attack me anywhere but i Have to have the ability to defend myself oppsed to watching somone in God mode kill me.

[Chevron]

Works fine as it is. or it would mean that anyone could just steal resources just to lure folks into hitting them and thus flagging them.
or by waiting outside tribe l;and untill some folks start gathering and then hit provoke flagging enabling them to attack tho folks on tribe land.

Plenty of reason to keep it as it is, else you can just as well remove all save zones. perhaps whit the combat review it can change to a more adv flagging system but for now its fine. traveled around quite a bit and this is not a problem, just say away of tribes if you carry something wroth it for now.

How is allowing pvp but giving the attacker complete invulnrabilty ok by any means as i have absolutly never seen this in a game as it is by no means an acceptable feature.

[Archangei]

If this is the way it is supposed to be then it is an appaling game mechanic as the attacking party should at least become flagged to you so you may defend yourself.

[Zephyr]

Works fine. If you're too lazy to run around their territory, you deserve to get ganked. It's called their 'territory' for a reason.

[Chavoda]

You made your point, and I explained why it currently works as it is. it will change in time no doubt. but its not a priority right now.
this should be posted in the tweaks section and not in prelude talk in the first place.


this is a game that always need work, it wil never ever be perfect. you have a point to talk about or like to see changed, make a constructive post (your done that) and let people discuss it. if you want to reply yourself again you need to bring valid points to the table. and not simply repeat what you said before. that brings it nowhere.

-I- don't see this isseu as a priority, it gives you and the baddies a save spot to retread tho. it gives you and them control, it stops -grief-attemps that would be possible in a flagging system.
in time it will get better.

[Chevron]

Works fine. If you're too lazy to run around their territory, you deserve to get ganked. It's called their 'territory' for a reason.

Again...i expected a response like this and answered it in thread start. None should be given absolute invulnrability. If i walk onto tribe land and am attacked I should be able to defend myself. You call people lazy for not wanting to find a 20 min walk around in order to avoid people in god mode? Honestly it is ridiculous to allow people to attack you but not be attacked back and can be so easily fixed.

I honeslty don't understand how anyone would actually accept devs giving players the ability to attack somone/loot someone while they remane invulnrable.

[Chevron]

You made your point, and I explained why it currently works as it is. it will change in time no doubt. but its not a priority right now.
this should be posted in the tweaks section and not in prelude talk in the first place.


this is a game that always need work, it wil never ever be perfect. you have a point to talk about or like to see changed, make a constructive post (your done that) and let people discuss it. if you want to reply yourself again you need to bring valid points to the table. and not simply repeat what you said before. that brings it nowhere.

-I- don't see this isseu as a priority, it gives you and the baddies a save spot to retread tho. it gives you and them control, it stops -grief-attemps that would be possible in a flagging system.
in time it will get better.

Ok so lets go over some valid points.

It does not allow greifing as again no one can attack you first but you may attack the person trespassing on your land. If you belive they are stronger then yourself then you grab a few tribe mates and all attack him and kill him but he should be able to defend himself.

Your second argument was people sitting outside tribe land and hit provoking...i dont see how that is really plausible. The player makes the decision and if you attack somone you should be flagged to them so they may defend themselves.

[Proto]

/agree 100%

yepyep

[Last_Rites]

What if you give a little in both areas. If the territory is good aligned you can pass through it, but if you grab resources or such then they can attack you and remain safe. However if they attack you for no reason you can return hostility. I can see baiting being a problem though if you can go into their area grab resources, maybe only one guy there attacks you and you kill him and rob him blind. There has to be a mechanic that allows the "little guy" to be reasonable safe and be able to protect his/her stuff without getting buried next to their own totem. At least this would allow you to defend yourself from straight out aggression Chevron.

Just an idea though.

[Chavoda]

Do you know you can walk on someones land and steal (sort) of any pile cloth/metal/plastic/leather. or just collect grass and scrap.

Do you realize people can and will camp you out by sittin ontop of whatever it is they seen you going to. sand,grantie,junkyard,water.

do you know there are tribe and solo player. small and large tribes.

I know you want a flagging system in place and hey I agree , it would be nice to have a adv flagging system, but right now its design is simple and if you now remove the savety flag of people that are engaged in combat the game would become instand pk heaven.

I spent about 4 hours last night camping out a small tribe of gankers who untill then had free roam and were pestering the neiborhood.if I and the tribe next door I made friends whit could have hit them on thier tribal land they would not even have had time to heal up after spawning.

theres a reason it is as it is right now, whitout it there is a real chance -you- or anyone else would get spawncamped untill you log off.
PvP aint civil not the "evil" tribes or the "good" tribes. once people go on a war path for wahtever reason they might have they will try to get absolute victory true any means avalible.

[PrinceReaper]

talk about a one sided grief mechanic...just looks like a reason for people to grief others.

1. other person can not fight back
2. can there really be laws in a world where huge devastation hit mankind.
3. grief mechanic
4. god like protection
5. defend your lands? from what, the guy fishing in the lake

I think this pretty much sums it up.

Like who would risk stepping on someone else's land where they are at risk and can not even defend themselves, talk about completely unrealistic and failed mechanic , like this will just create more ganking and griefing for people who are not part of that small enclosed community.

would you dare try trade with others in their tribal lands? o.0

[Z_E_N]

There's supposed to be a war declaration system eventually isn't there? Then tribes can attack other tribes.

Until then, there is PLENTY of open land in the game to pvp in; the tribe radius isn't so huge that you will constantly be walking through tribal land.

Just wait for the war declarations, then it will be fine; in the meantime.. build up your tribe or fight in open ground.

[carlosfc1986]

ive posted about this like 3 weeks ago, still no answer, still people who seem to dont understand, or who plan to stay in their tribe area and enjoy killing people who enter and cannot defend back? this is a NONSENSE is completly POINTLESS, this mechanic should change NOW but devs still silent about it, this do not catter the carebear playerbase, this is like a gift? they can stay on their tribe area and gank anyone, noob or veteran who pass thru. Is not me the one who will be going to another tribe area to trade...because they could kill me and loot me without me being able to defend.



people who say this works fine is just plain stupid, no debate there.


PD: i honeslty ask myself if ppl do read and understand whats happening here, cos i dont undertstand some answers

[Hopibear]

/agree 100%

!!! yessirr

[Doc]

talk about a one sided grief mechanic...just looks like a reason for people to grief others.

?


1. other person can not fight back

good


2. can there really be laws in a world where huge devastation hit mankind.

Ummm, selective realism. Either go all the way, or stop whining.


3. grief mechanic

??


4. god like protection

Yup, we have old gods rising and stuff. Yah, its not realistic, who cares, lots of stuff isnt realistic.


5. defend your lands? from what, the guy fishing in the lake

If you politely ask if you can fish on tribal territory, i guess youll get your answer very soon. One way or the other.


Like who would risk stepping on someone else's land where they are at risk and can not even defend themselves,

Thats the idea, what the heck you are doing on another tribes territory if you have no business there and havent established any form of communication with that tribe?


would you dare try trade with others in their tribal lands? o.0

Yah, the ones that are respectable, ones that are known gankers/griefers - no way.

[carlosfc1986]

i wonder why is always this HOPIE TRIBE guys the ones who defend this things? DO U REALLY WANT A GAME LIKE THIS?, do u really want to go to other tibe area and get killed without being able to fight back? it makes nonsense but OH..WAIT...u will tell me to stay in my tribe land building my house, or to just go around the tribe area so i dont get killed right? stupid arguments tbh, this is a sandbox, and this mechanics is not working properly, but im sure ill see another person from hopi tribe or another carebear tribe who will try to defend this mechanic.


PD: im sure ur intelligence dont let u see how u would still be GOD PROTECTED in ur tribe area if u dont attack the intruder...but if u do he should be able to fight back. POINT

now HOPI TRIBE plz stop defending wrong mechanics or u will make the game fail. it will still be carebearish enought for u so dont worry

[Doc]

i wonder why is always this HOPIE TRIBE guys the ones who defend this things? DO U REALLY WANT A GAME LIKE THIS?, do u really want to go to other tibe area and get killed without being able to fight back? it makes nonsense but OH..WAIT...u will tell me to stay in my tribe land building my house, or to just go around the tribe area so i dont get killed right? stupid arguments tbh, this is a sandbox, and this mechanics is not working properly, but im sure ill see another person from hopi tribe or another carebear tribe who will try to defend this mechanic.

Working good, i dont want to go to another tribe area if im not welcomed there, its their little circle where they make the rules.



PD: im sure ur intelligence dont let u see how u would still be GOD PROTECTED in ur tribe area if u dont attack the intruder...but if u do he should be able to fight back. POINT

You are perfectly fine to go around the area. I guess it is matter of intelligence.


now HOPI TRIBE plz stop defending wrong mechanics or u will make the game fail. it will still be carebearish enought for u so dont worry

Thank you for your input.

EDIT: to the OP: most of the tribes will let you walk through if you dont cause trouble or if they know you, interact with people, ask permission, behave, stay clear of known ganker/griefer ones and you will be just fine. It is a MMO, and interacting with others is one of staples of MMOs.

[Eremon]

Just to make myself "Clear" this is NOT a thread about how there should or or should Not be SafeZones in the game.

This thread is about a broken game mechanic within the SafeZones.

I tested this in three diffrent tribe lands to be sure and found that if i walk on a tribes land they can attack me "Without" me provoking them or taking resources and yet they remain completly "INVULNRABLE" to my attacks so there is no self defense.

If this is the way it is supposed to be then it is an appaling game mechanic as the attacking party should at least become flagged to you so you may defend yourself.

1. It's working as intended.
2. Your defense is: Stay off other people's property.

It is not a "broken mechanic".

[sxxxxe]

/agree 100%

i agree too this as well.

In my point of view this is definitely a broken game feature or at least a miss conception.
Its fine and necessary that tribe members can defend their territory but everyone has to be able to fight BACK.

Here are my suggestions:

1. Visitor walks on tribal land but he cannot attack someone from that tribe (so we get a save tribal zone).
2. Visitor walks on tribal land and gets attacked he can defend himself, cause he has not shown any aggressiveness.
3. Visitor walks on tribal land and start stealing resources he can be attacked.

I see the reasons why it is like it is but this feature destroy exploring completely. Think about a traders who trie to reach tribals, there is no way he can protect himself.

Thx

[Doc]

Think about a traders who trie to reach tribals, there is no way he can protect himself.Thx

Respect traders, dont gank/grief them and they wont have to protect themselves. Its a relationship. Comminication, interaction. Gank/grief few traders on your tribal land (or anywhere in the world that is) and say BB to traders. Its on you and your tribe to establish rules in the circle (and well outside the circle).

Slight modification of the rule is an option, but im more on communication/interaction side of things - get to know the tribe, get to know the player, form relationships and it works good.

[sxxxxe]

Respect traders, dont gank/grief them and they wont have to protect themselves. Its a relationship. Comminication, interaction. Gank/grief few traders on your tribal land (or anywhere in the world that is) and say BB to traders. Its on you and your tribe to establish rules in the circle (and well outside the circle).

Slight modification of the rule is an option, but im more on communication/interaction side of things - get to know the tribe, get to know the player, form relationships and it works good.

Yes, i agree with you, all you said is true but it feels "unnatural" to me to not be able to protect yourself. You know what i mean? Everything you said would be possible even when you remove the limitation i complain about and i think it would be more "natural" too.

[PrinceReaper]

Respect traders, dont gank/grief them and they wont have to protect themselves. Its a relationship. Comminication, interaction. Gank/grief few traders on your tribal land (or anywhere in the world that is) and say BB to traders. Its on you and your tribe to establish rules in the circle (and well outside the circle).

Slight modification of the rule is an option, but im more on communication/interaction side of things - get to know the tribe, get to know the player, form relationships and it works good.

for the average tribe this is impossible, since the average person will just attack someone who can not fight back and its like not like you have the chance to be like "im a trader" because of the risk being so great, and trading not being a major thing since theres no safe zones for both parties and there being no trade tools, it just create a circle which in the end of the day there will be people who had bad experinces with guilds and will just give up trading.

the effect of this is that solo'ers will be mostly affected and most tribes and people will not trade with each other.

it might be possible for a guild like forsakan but not a guild of your caliber.

The risk is 2 great and plus if I get attacked, no matter who land it is, I should have a right to defend me self.

[Eremon]

Yes, i agree with you, all you said is true but it feels "unnatural" to me to not be able to protect yourself. You know what i mean? Everything you said would be possible even when you remove the limitation i complain about and i think it would be more "natural" too.

You guys don't seem to understand.

From the FAQ:

11.) Will there be PvP?

Yes, the game is open PVP with consequences and a sparring / training combat mode. In the early Prelude towns will be safe zones.
_____________________________________________

Part of that "safe zone" design is the fact that you can't waltz onto a tribe or homestead property and attack a player, or steal without "consequences". The fact that you can't retaliate against the property owner is BY DESIGN a "consequence" for the PRELUDE.

Once the Prelude ends (in at least 6-9 months), the safe zone ends, and the combat rules change.

[KeithStone]

It was made this way because people would grief the tribes, so they gave the tribes a way to get rid of those that were doing the griefing.

However, you shouldn't be on another tribe territory if you do not know they tribe or have a valid reason to be there.

If you are there to steal resources then run, run run!!!

[blackzilla]

Works fine as it is. or it would mean that anyone could just steal resources just to lure folks into hitting them and thus flagging them.
or by waiting outside tribe l;and untill some folks start gathering and then hit provoke flagging enabling them to attack tho folks on tribe land.

Plenty of reason to keep it as it is, else you can just as well remove all save zones. perhaps whit the combat review it can change to a more adv flagging system but for now its fine. traveled around quite a bit and this is not a problem, just say away of tribes if you carry something wroth it for now.

Agreed ^^^^

It is fine, and OP stay out of camps, would you walk into my home without being invited?

[outfctrl]

Actually, I am glad they can kill me. Makes it more fun to try and sneak in and do a little scavenging without getting caught.
Wait till it gets dark, sneak around the trees. They cant see you. The way the game is set up, they have to be just about next to you to see you.

Last nite, someone ran through our Tribe. I caught a glimpse of him, but before I could chase him, he disappeared. I ran all over our area, but never caught him. It was fun.

Keep it the way it is

[Doc]

Yes, i agree with you, all you said is true but it feels "unnatural" to me to not be able to protect yourself. You know what i mean? Everything you said would be possible even when you remove the limitation i complain about and i think it would be more "natural" too.

Well, plan is to replace unnatural safe zones with natural (semi) safe ones after prelude. But thats for after prelude when tools to do so are ingame. Anyway, you can pretty easily avoid any of tribal/homestead safe zones, theyre not that big. Make friends, make relationships and there should be no problem.


for the average tribe this is impossible, since the average person will just attack someone who can not fight back and its like not like you have the chance to be like "im a trader" because of the risk being so great, and trading not being a major thing since theres no safe zones for both parties and there being no trade tools, it just create a circle which in the end of the day there will be people who had bad experinces with guilds and will just give up trading.

Well, thats on community and your tribe to do. If you feel the need to gank someone that you know cannot hurt you, well thats your problem really. I see more problems if it would be other way.


the effect of this is that solo'ers will be mostly affected and most tribes and people will not trade with each other.

Prelude is community/world building phase. If you dont want to trade with anyone, thats your problem, anyway, whats preventing tribes to setup trade on neutral territory ouside safe zones? Who says tribes must trade inside safe-zones? If noone wants to trade with you on your territory, and vice versa, its your own fault. You reap what you sow.


it might be possible for a guild like forsakan but not a guild of your caliber.

Why dont you let us organize our tribe how we see fit, and you organize yours how you see fit.


The risk is 2 great and plus if I get attacked, no matter who land it is, I should have a right to defend me self.

Dont go on other people's tribe territory and you will be just fine, you will be able to defend yourself as much as you want.

[dlld]

i agree too this as well.

In my point of view this is definitely a broken game feature or at least a miss conception.
Its fine and necessary that tribe members can defend their territory but everyone has to be able to fight BACK.

Here are my suggestions:

1. Visitor walks on tribal land but he cannot attack someone from that tribe (so we get a save tribal zone).
2. Visitor walks on tribal land and gets attacked he can defend himself, cause he has not shown any aggressiveness.
3. Visitor walks on tribal land and start stealing resources he can be attacked.

I see the reasons why it is like it is but this feature destroy exploring completely. Think about a traders who trie to reach tribals, there is no way he can protect himself.

Thx

This altough I would add

3. Visitor walks on tribal land and start stealing resources he can be attacked and not be able to defend himself.

[Jadzia]

I tested this in three diffrent tribe lands to be sure and found that if i walk on a tribes land they can attack me "Without" me provoking them or taking resources and yet they remain completly "INVULNRABLE" to my attacks so there is no self defense.


An evil tribe's land is not a safe zone, you can fight back there.

If you walk into a good/neutral tribe's territory, if they attack when you are not flagged for stealing and you are not an evil player then the tribe or the attacker will lose his 'good' alignment. Good/neutral tribes won't risk it.

[Chevron]

The people claiming this is a stable game mechanic that will stop griefing are so far off it is ridiculous. This mechanic creats an enclosed community and deters global trading but actually Creates Hardcore Griefing.

A guy runs through a tribes territory to save himself a 20 min walkaround with a good deal of loot and is attacked only to find that he cannot fight back which will = Rage and this guy gathering his buddys to wait untill your land is clear of people and will at that point gather your resources throughout the night while just deleating them as it will be his only way to get back at you.

I can tell you this is exactly the type of behavior that will happen. It will be far more extreme then somone coming on to your land and attempting to get you to attack them. You don't have to take my word for it I am telling you and the devs...People will rage and destroy resources after being killed and not able to fight back as it is not QQ it is simply all we are able to do to get back at the invulnrable person who killed us.

[Chevron]

An evil tribe's land is not a safe zone, you can fight back there.

If you walk into a good/neutral tribe's territory, if they attack when you are not flagged for stealing and you are not an evil player then the tribe or the attacker will lose his 'good' alignment. Good/neutral tribes won't risk it.

Post link to to this quote or info from dev and if it is true it is a mechanic that does not work currently.

[Proto]

Pretty much. We ran across some guys yesterday that wouldn't come out of their town to fight even though they're PVPers, so we started chopping down and destroying all their trees (had there been more we could do to entice them out we would have). The latter behavior will only get worse (or better depending on your pov) so long as you can't fight back.

imo, dev guy needs to decide if he wants an accurate view of a post apocalyptic world or not.

[Jadzia]

The people claiming this is a stable game mechanic that will stop griefing are so far off it is ridiculous. This mechanic creats an enclosed community and deters global trading but actually Creates Hardcore Griefing.

A guy runs through a tribes territory to save himself a 20 min walkaround with a good deal of loot and is attacked only to find that he cannot fight back which will = Rage and this guy gathering his buddys to wait untill your land is clear of people and will at that point gather your resources throughout the night while just deleating them as it will be his only way to get back at you.

I can tell you this is exactly the type of behavior that will happen. It will be far more extreme then somone coming on to your land and attempting to get you to attack them. You don't have to take my word for it I am telling you and the devs...People will rage and destroy resources after being killed and not able to fight back as it is not QQ it is simply all we are able to do to get back at the invulnrable person who killed us.
That will happen anyway, there is no way to avoid it right now. If an evil player is silly enough to run into the middle of his enemy's (aka good tribes) land he will die. Even if he could fight back he would be so outnumbered that he would QQ anyway after being killed.

And as far as I see, stealing and destroying resources will happen. Griefers don't need a reason to grief, they just do it for fun.

[tredo]

To your second point, I am working on an Outfitters post, if you come on my land it will because I welcome open trading, chances are that most tribes will be like this.. why make a quest totem! The tribes that KOS anyone not in their tribe are probably the PvP tribes and to be honest, I think they are reckless and unorganized right now. This whole PvP kill on sight, gank anyone you see will settle down once the warring feature is implemented. If anyone comes onto my homestead they will be greeted warmly, I do not feel threated on my own land as I can not be harmed. Why would I attack anyone that is looking to do business? So don't assume that allot of tribal lands you will be KOS'd, that simply is not the case.

[Doc]

The people claiming this is a stable game mechanic that will stop griefing are so far off it is ridiculous. This mechanic creats an enclosed community and deters global trading but actually Creates Hardcore Griefing.

A guy runs through a tribes territory to save himself a 20 min walkaround with a good deal of loot and is attacked only to find that he cannot fight back which will = Rage and this guy gathering his buddys to wait untill your land is clear of people and will at that point gather your resources throughout the night while just deleating them as it will be his only way to get back at you.

I can tell you this is exactly the type of behavior that will happen. It will be far more extreme then somone coming on to your land and attempting to get you to attack them. You don't have to take my word for it I am telling you and the devs...People will rage and destroy resources after being killed and not able to fight back as it is not QQ it is simply all we are able to do to get back at the invulnrable person who killed us.

Hmmm, have you considered.....not killing a guy that runs through tribes territory? You know, you dont have to gank everything that walks, crawls and flies, but i guess, that goes against your "playstyle".

So, fear destruction of your own resources by vengeful people you killed (and looted). And im pretty sure certain tribes will do that regularly to some other tribes, so that other tribes will have all the more satisfaction to kick poachers out with god-mode.

I like idea of status quo safe zones more and more :)

[Eremon]

The latter behavior will only get worse (or better depending on your pov) so long as you can't fight back.

No it won't. If it rises to a level of "griefing" a tribe/player in attempt to goad them into engaging you in "Pvp", the griefers will be dealt with by the GM's. Griefing is not an accepted form of gameplay.

[Jadzia]

Post link to to this quote or info from dev and if it is true it is a mechanic that does not work currently.


When tribes are formed an overall tribe alignment is chosen. Players in a good or neutral tribe will automatically become outcasts if they ‘gank’ a good or neutral player of a non enemy tribe.

link:http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/32-Conflict-Death-Consequences-and-Decisions

And you are right, the alignment system is switched off for now.

[mgilbrtsn]

I agree with the OP. You should always be able to defend yourself. Especially since boundaries are not visible.

[Aramanu]

here's some info i guess most of you are missing(i bolded the important parts):

"In the Prelude:

Unconsciousness results in very minor skill loss and in general the victor will be allowed to loot an item of choice as a reward for a fight well fought.

Death results in some stat and skill loss and allows the victor to fully loot the player. This is not without complications and consequences for the victor.

- Carrying capacity is limited, so fully looting another player will not be practical.

- A dead or unconscious player can be looted by friends as well as enemies. Friends have the loot advantage by having a quick button to rescue select loot from a fellow player. The advantage is to players that fight in groups and players that know when to pack up and flee from a losing battle.

- Killing or looting a person that is not in an enemy tribe will cause severe reputation loss with the other tribe and within your own tribe.

And there’s more…

When tribes are formed an overall tribe alignment is chosen. Players in a good or neutral tribe will automatically become outcasts if they ‘gank’ a good or neutral player of a non enemy tribe.

Players from an evil tribe are free to loot and pillage and will gain reputation within their own tribe for doing so, but they will also be vulnerable to attacks from all players who will be able to attack evil players without negative consequences. Players in good or neutral tribes will be allowed to put bounty quests on known evil players. In essence, if a tribe chooses to be evil they become the ‘monsters’ of the world.

Tribes can choose different levels of diplomacy with each other.

Players from friendly or allied tribes can fight each other, but only to unconsciousness and without looting capability.

Players from rival tribes can fight each other to unconsciousness with partial loot to the victor. Potentially the amount of looting can be agreed upon by rival tribes. (Setting the amount of looting is not currently implemented, but it’s something I am considering).

Players from enemy tribes at war can fight to the death with full looting (Potentially tribe leaders can come to a looting agreement for this as well).

Tribal leaders can set what actions are acceptable by their tribe members, in effect determining the laws within each tribe. Even an evil tribe may have a set of lows for its members to follow in order to maintain civil trade and exchange with other tribes.

Two good tribes can not become enemies, they can become rivals at worst.

Breaking the rules agreed upon by your tribes is possible but will result in a warning. If you proceed to act after the warning, your character is set to full evil mode and your reputation, alignment and karma consequences will be severe."

Taken from here http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/32-Conflict-Death-Consequences-and-Decisions

[Proto]

No it won't. If it rises to a level of "griefing" a tribe/player in attempt to goad them into engaging you in "Pvp", the griefers will be dealt with by the GM's. Griefing is not an accepted form of gameplay.

You lack vision. Just turn it into a greater political context of territory wars and the "griefers" will be fine. Scorched earth is a timeless classic of warfare.

[Jadzia]

I agree with the OP. You should always be able to defend yourself. Especially since boundaries are not visible.
They are not visible, but the game do inform you that you have entered a tribe's territory. Its a bigger problem IMO that you don't know the alignment of the tribe you are visiting. That will cause a big problem when it comes to trading and questing, no one will dare to enter since there is no way to check a tribe's alignment, you simply have to believe what they say.

[Proto]

Hmmm, have you considered.....not killing a guy that runs through tribes territory? You know, you dont have to gank everything that walks, crawls and flies, but i guess, that goes against your "playstyle".

So, fear destruction of your own resources by vengeful people you killed (and looted). And im pretty sure certain tribes will do that regularly to some other tribes, so that other tribes will have all the more satisfaction to kick poachers out with god-mode.

I like idea of status quo safe zones more and more :)

I see some of your former Shadowbane players in guild have gone soft kicking around in Hopi Tribe w/this attitude, that doesn't bode well.

[Proto]

The tribes that KOS anyone not in their tribe are probably the PvP tribes and to be honest, I think they are reckless and unorganized right now.

I wouldn't put my money on that.


This whole PvP kill on sight, gank anyone you see will settle down once the warring feature is implemented.

It will settle down if the warring feature is implemented well, if not, open pvp and ganking it is.

[Chevron]

link:http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/32-Conflict-Death-Consequences-and-Decisions

And you are right, the alignment system is switched off for now.

That does not state it will happen if they gank a player on their tribe land. It states in general.

[Doc]

Pretty much. We ran across some guys yesterday that wouldn't come out of their town to fight even though they're PVPers, so we started chopping down and destroying all their trees (had there been more we could do to entice them out we would have). The latter behavior will only get worse (or better depending on your pov) so long as you can't fight back.

Ummm, that will happen anyway, dont really see how its connected to the issue. What, if you cannot gank players, you will gank....trees?

If the tribe doesnt want to protect its surroundings...


I see some of your former Shadowbane players in guild have gone soft kicking around in Hopi Tribe w/this attitude, that doesn't bode well.

Everyone is so considerate to Hopi tribe :) What else do you suggest for betterment of Hopi tribe?


It will settle down if the warring feature is implemented well, if not, open pvp and ganking it is.

Well, i guess we will have to wait a while to find out how it will be, im itching to find out myself.

[Chevron]

Where is the balance for this game?

Your going to have good tribes created to go after evil tribes as that is there playstyle and you will have evil tribes created as it is their playstyle.

The good tribe can sit back on their land completly invulnrable and the evil tribe can do nothing but the good tribe can walk over and do as they wish in the evil tribes land.

[MrKrueak]

while i'm all for safezones in prelude it should not allow them to be invulnerable if they attack someone within their tribe area that to me would be a bug and needs to be fixed.

[Chevron]

while i'm all for safezones in prelude it should not allow them to be invulnerable if they attack someone within their tribe area that to me would be a bug and needs to be fixed.

100% agree

[Doc]

Where is the balance for this game?

Your going to have good tribes created to go after evil tribes as that is there playstyle and you will have evil tribes created as it is their playstyle.

The good tribe can sit back on their land completly invulnrable and the evil tribe can do nothing but the good tribe can walk over and do as they wish in the evil tribes land.

Nothing stops you from being good :) Its just a setting on a tribe :) If you cannot do the time, dont do the crime :)

[baka77]

I would be fine with a flagging system that allowed you to defend yourself. However, I think it would probably need to go both ways, though. If a player goes to another tribe's land & collects any resource (getting the "you are encroaching..." message), then that player gets flagged as a free kill & can't defend themselves.

However, if that same player minds his/her manners & doesn't encroach on the tribe's resources then they should be granted the right to defend themselves if attacked unprovoked.

I would actually take that a step further, for the sake of fun. Why not enable something like guest rights & hospitality? If a tribe kills a visitor unprovoked, then the God's deem them beyond evil...removing all their safe zone protections for a limited time!

And there it is. It's all about provocation. He who provokes must reap what their actions sow. Not 100% realistic, but a good compromise for gamesmanship in my opinion.

[bodangly]

I am sorely disappointed to see all the apologists in this thread. This is clearly a broken mechanic.

The attacker must be flagged to the victim. No one should be able to kill another player with 0 risk, the thought of it is absurdly imbalanced and unfair. Never have I seen a mechanic such as this in my long MMO career dating back to MUDs.

[Mystais]

It discourages trespassing, plain and simple. Changing it will only encourage idiots to come waltzing into another tribe's safe zone for the sole purpose of pissing off that tribe and getting them to attack.

No one is forcing you to trespass and no one is forcing the tribe to attack trespassers.

[Chavoda]

Yup,

tho who say this mechanic is bad as it is now.. and those who see the flagging system working but neeeded a chance were the person visiting needs to do a hostile action first. (attack or stealing)

How about I come to you. and start to use the chicken sound animation for 10 hours , or just call you some, run around jumping in front of you.
how about me going to sit right on the spot you are building a wall and moat. ? I can sit anywhere I like, no rules against that. and people are that crazy to keep it up for hours upon hours finding it fun.

As I said on page one, there plenty of reasons why this is now in place and no doubt there will be a better system in place at some point, but specially for the start of the game this is needed.

[Dubanka]

The only issue i have with the safe zones right now is just the notification that you're in one...

yes you get the little bit of text when you walk in, after that, you're kinda guessing ('did i leave it and miss the text?)

I know it's a sandbox and all that, but a little bit of UI intuitive features would be huge...namely:

A Compass with a text bar noting the current zone you're in...this would be HUGE. We already have the grid coords ticking, which you can use once you get the hang of it...but a compass...MY KINGDOM FOR A COMPASS.

so yeah. Seeing that i'm in someone elses house would be nice...so when you're hauling ass out of there you know definitely when it's safe to fight back (as opposed to 'did i miss the little white text?...i should be out of it by now...')

[Chevron]

I am sorely disappointed to see all the apologists in this thread. This is clearly a broken mechanic.

The attacker must be flagged to the victim. No one should be able to kill another player with 0 risk, the thought of it is absurdly imbalanced and unfair. Never have I seen a mechanic such as this in my long MMO career dating back to MUDs.

agreed

[Chevron]

I would be fine with a flagging system that allowed you to defend yourself. However, I think it would probably need to go both ways, though. If a player goes to another tribe's land & collects any resource (getting the "you are encroaching..." message), then that player gets flagged as a free kill & can't defend themselves.

However, if that same player minds his/her manners & doesn't encroach on the tribe's resources then they should be granted the right to defend themselves if attacked unprovoked.

I would actually take that a step further, for the sake of fun. Why not enable something like guest rights & hospitality? If a tribe kills a visitor unprovoked, then the God's deem them beyond evil...removing all their safe zone protections for a limited time!

And there it is. It's all about provocation. He who provokes must reap what their actions sow. Not 100% realistic, but a good compromise for gamesmanship in my opinion.

I would agree to almost anything other then giving somone the ability to attack you while remaining invulnrable

[baka77]

Yup,

tho who say this mechanic is bad as it is now.. and those who see the flagging system working but neeeded a chance were the person visiting needs to do a hostile action first. (attack or stealing)

How about I come to you. and start to use the chicken sound animation for 10 hours , or just call you some, run around jumping in front of you.
how about me going to sit right on the spot you are building a wall and moat. ? I can sit anywhere I like, no rules against that. and people are that crazy to keep it up for hours upon hours finding it fun.

As I said on page one, there plenty of reasons why this is now in place and no doubt there will be a better system in place at some point, but specially for the start of the game this is needed.

Hmmm, there are currently scenarios where the griefing you suggested is still possible even under the current rule set. What is to stop a player who wants to be a nuisance from doing so? As long as they're not evil aligned, they can just keep respawning to make their chicken sounds & standing in the way of structure building. Even killing them won't help unless Jordi implements a "move corpse" command. Asshats are always going to find a way to be asshats if they are truly committed their asshattery.

Imagine that on a large scale...a tribe of 100 nekkid peeps that chicken corpse camp Hopi for hours on end. With such short respawn timers, doubtless there would be clucking chickens up & running around non-stop. It would take some serious commitment, but the youtube out-takes would be hilarious.

[baka77]

I would agree to almost anything other then giving somone the ability to attack you while remaining invulnrable

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

[Dubanka]

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

/amen

also, whether 'good' or 'evil' you should not be able to respawn on another tribes land.

[Chevron]

this invulnrability being given to people who can attack you needs to be fixed or discussed by devs A.S.A.P as it is a broken game mechanic

[Doc]

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

I guess thats what we all are waiting for :) (And archery ;P )

Until then current mechanics is most optimal solution. Is it perfect? No.

And yah, compass, map...ASAP pls ;)

[Zenmaster13]

this invulnrability being given to people who can attack you needs to be fixed or discussed by devs A.S.A.P as it is a broken game mechanic

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best. The mechanic you speak of could be viewed as beneficial just as easily as the opposite. You seem very emotionally tied to it. Let it go. Stay off others land. If you are a criminal in real life, and you walk into a police station, you can't really fight back. You could avoid the place or stick your face inside then run away. Same goes for private property. You don't belong there, and even if you do fight back, the law will side with the owner, not the trespasser.

Hope that helps your immersion complex.

[Zenmaster13]

double post ugh...

[orious13]

Heh.. I never attack first (can't tell alignment firstly). It's not about "being soft". It's about being realistic. Not even in an Apocalypse would I attack someone without reason. I ran through a lot of tribes yesterday...encroached by foraging and drinking. No one attacked me. I wasn't doing anything wrong. I had no reason to attack them.<--- That's really it.

While the current mechanic is in place, if you walk into someone's territory who instantly attacks you you will know what kind of people they are. That's the same as if the opposite happened.

I could careless if the mechanic stays or not. At the moment friends and "friendly" people will be welcome. Later on alignment will dictate how you act towards others.

Not everyone is going to straight up attack you for no reason. That's how a sandbox community should be. The notion of everyone's your enemy except your alliance that's in every combat focused sandbox should be done away with. Everyone should be neutral unless proven otherwise.

[Chevron]

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best. The mechanic you speak of could be viewed as beneficial just as easily as the opposite. You seem very emotionally tied to it. Let it go. Stay off others land. If you are a criminal in real life, and you walk into a police station, you can't really fight back. You could avoid the place or stick your face inside then run away. Same goes for private property. You don't belong there, and even if you do fight back, the law will side with the owner, not the trespasser.

Hope that helps your immersion complex.

That is the worst argument i have yet to see as a reason why the current game mechanic is not broken. lol

[Zenmaster13]

That is the worst argument i have yet to see as a reason why the current game mechanic is not broken. lol

Pick apart the arguement, dont' just say my opinion is right and your opinion is wrong. How is it the worst arguement? Working as intended seems very clear to me. Take off your emotional blinders for a few minutes.

Again, by definition, something that is working as intended, is not broken. Example(so you understand): A wheel rolls, so it is working as intended, but if the wheel is flat, it will not roll, so it is a broken mechanic.

[Zephyr]

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best.

/signed. All you people bandying about words like "broken" and "bug" clearly have never worked in software development. It seems to me people just want to get rid of the griefing-free zones. And that's an opinion.

[Dubanka]

/signed. All you people bandying about words like "broken" and "bug" clearly have never worked in software development. It seems to me people just want to get rid of the griefing-free zones. And that's an opinion.

of course all non-consensual pvp is griefing right *smirk*

but the system is working as intended...don't go into someone elses house unless you want to [potentially] get your face beat in and not be able to do anything about it. seems pretty simple

[jokhul]

Welcome to Xsyon, the World Building game with a side-order of FFA-PvP :D

If Jooky stays true to the design his been selling since he started creating Xsyon, then there are going to be many frustrated and crying PK'ers and griefers on these forums.

The deck is stacked in favour of the world builders, not the destroyers. The current safe-zone implementation is a clear indication of that.

[Chavoda]

Welcome to Xsyon, the World Building game with a side-order of FFA-PvP :D

If Jooky stays true to the design his been selling since he started creating Xsyon, then there are going to be many frustrated and crying PK'ers and griefers on these forums.

The deck is stacked in favour of the world builders, not the destroyers. The current safe-zone implementation is a clear indication of that.

Dont be to comfy tho, work on getting friends and allies people might be relative save now but war, War never changes.

[Zephyr]

Dont be to comfy tho, work on getting friends and allies people might be relative save now but war, War never changes.

If I understand you correctly, you're referring to the fact that the devs want to remove the safezones after the "Prelude" period. And you do have a good point. The no-griefing zones are temporary features set up to give the world-builders a head start. Anyone who does not have their house in order and their defenses secured by the time pvp rules are relaxed post-Prelude is in for a world of hurt. And I am looking forward to the challenge of defending society against the forces of chaos. :)

[ifireallymust]

Seems to be fine as it is, at least until we've all had more time to build. I've only been killed on tribeland once by someone I thought was one of the tribe members of that land. And I was scavanging resources!

Other times I've passed through tribe lands without so much as a friendly wave, people have seen me and just watched me go by, as I was clearly travelling and not foraging, fishing, scavanging, or lurking. I've even run out of breath and sat to rest on tribal land without anyone running up to attack.

[mrcalhou]

/agree 100%

Me, too. People should at least be able to defend themselves once they have been attacked.

It's not removing safe zones, because they still wouldn't be allowed to attack you. But if you do attack them then they can defend themselves. I do not see what the issue is.

[Eremon]

Me, too. People should at least be able to defend themselves once they have been attacked. I do not see what the issue is.

It's to deter gankers/griefers from disrupting the world-building process during the Prelude period. Some of you guys need to accept the fact that the focus of the Prelude is not Pvp, it's rebuilding civilization.

[Dubanka]

Some of this is really starting to crack me up. This theme is especially humorous.

It's to deter gankers/griefers from disrupting the world-building process during the Prelude period. Some of you guys need to accept the fact that the focus of the Prelude is not Pvp, it's rebuilding civilization.
- Footnote on history: civilizations don't build up peacefully
- Footnote on general animal behavior: If you're going to be 'non agressive' (ie. a deer, gazelle or bunny rabbit) you need to live life with your head on a swivel watching, listening, for predators. By not playing the game (and playing your own imagined version of what the game is)...you really make yourself the victim.

Hints to not being a victim:
1. if you're gathering in trash...when approaching trash, stop and listen. you can hear if others are moving about or sorting. use your mouselook and do a 360 to make sure no one else is around and or/approaching you.
2. toggle sneak and creep up the side of the pile till you have a higher vantage point. you toggle sneak because it makes you walk silently. If you see other people engage fight or flight or pray they wont attack me response.
3. when gathering, keep your head on a swivel...use mouselook to scan around while you're picking up the stuff.
4. dont overload yourself. Slow prey is dead prey.
5. if you see someone, they ARE DEFINITELY A THREAT IF THEY ADVANCE TOWARD YOU. drop your stuff, press x to sprint and haul ass the other way/back to camp.
6. pause every now and then while gathering to listen...wood chopping, trash jingling, all signs of aother players nearby.

Just as irl, you make yourself a victim when you do not pay attention to your surroundings and/or do not react to potentially threatening situations in a timely or appropriate manner. It is not the game's fault that you werent paying attention so i was able to sneak up behind you and plant a pick in the back of your skull.

If you want to avoid pvp, all the tools exist for you to do it...you just can't be lazy, you must be vigilant about maintaining awareness of your surroundings.

[Eremon]

Lengthy irrelevance omitted

1. Game is not "real" life.
2. Don't need a lesson on staying alive in a Pvp game. As a Vietnam Vet, I have more than enough experience with real PvP.

The issue is safe zones, and what transpires within them from a Pvp perspective. The game has rules in that regard to limit and dissuade pvp in safe zones during Pvp. End of story.

[Chevron]

1. Game is not "real" life.
2. Don't need a lesson on staying alive in a Pvp game. As a Vietnam Vet, I have more than enough experience with real PvP.

The issue is safe zones, and what transpires within them from a Pvp perspective. The game has rules in that regard to limit and dissuade pvp in safe zones during Pvp. End of story.

No...if your read the reason for this thread you would realise this is not an issue with the game having safe zones..its an issue with the mechanic within the safezone.

Please read about the thread before posting

This is about people being able to defend themselves if attacked.

[fflhktsn]

If I understand you correctly, you're referring to the fact that the devs want to remove the safezones after the "Prelude" period. And you do have a good point. The no-griefing zones are temporary features set up to give the world-builders a head start. Anyone who does not have their house in order and their defenses secured by the time pvp rules are relaxed post-Prelude is in for a world of hurt. And I am looking forward to the challenge of defending society against the forces of chaos. :)


All its going to end up doing, is giving people who joined early, and unfair advantage to anyone who joines during tribal wars.

Your going to make players down the road deal with a high risk world, and all these tribes now will have had many months of safe growth. No new tribe is ever going to be able to compete with a tribe that had the advantage of safezones.

No one sees this as an issue down the road? Unfair advantages are UNFAIR. Even if they benefit me as an early joiner.

[jokhul]

All its going to end up doing, is giving people who joined early, and unfair advantage to anyone who joines during tribal wars.

Your going to make players down the road deal with a high risk world, and all these tribes now will have had many months of safe growth. No new tribe is ever going to be able to compete with a tribe that had the advantage of safezones.

No one sees this as an issue down the road? Unfair advantages are UNFAIR. Even if they benefit me as an early joiner.

Agreed !

Make the safe zones permanent, otherwise it will be massively unfair to new people that join in 6 or 9 months' time :D

[fflhktsn]

the only solution is to not have safezones.

we cant destroy property anyway

[Chevron]

Jookies Combat update

Conflict, Death, Consequences and Decisions

A few people have posted questions regarding PVP and death in Xsyon. I will explain the system a little more.

PVP is open, but it has severe consequences.

Players can choose to fight in different combat modes: to the death or to unconsciousness. (I'd love to say 'to the pain' but that's not quite right).

In the Prelude, technically neither results in actual death.

As religion enters the game during the prelude there will be forms of permanent death as well as resurrection but the details about this will be given later.

In the Prelude:

Unconsciousness results in very minor skill loss and in general the victor will be allowed to loot an item of choice as a reward for a fight well fought.

Death results in some stat and skill loss and allows the victor to fully loot the player. This is not without complications and consequences for the victor.

- Carrying capacity is limited, so fully looting another player will not be practical.

- A dead or unconscious player can be looted by friends as well as enemies. Friends have the loot advantage by having a quick button to rescue select loot from a fellow player. The advantage is to players that fight in groups and players that know when to pack up and flee from a losing battle.

- Killing or looting a person that is not in an enemy tribe will cause severe reputation loss with the other tribe and within your own tribe.

And there’s more…

When tribes are formed an overall tribe alignment is chosen. Players in a good or neutral tribe will automatically become outcasts if they ‘gank’ a good or neutral player of a non enemy tribe.

Players from an evil tribe are free to loot and pillage and will gain reputation within their own tribe for doing so, but they will also be vulnerable to attacks from all players who will be able to attack evil players without negative consequences. Players in good or neutral tribes will be allowed to put bounty quests on known evil players. In essence, if a tribe chooses to be evil they become the ‘monsters’ of the world.

Tribes can choose different levels of diplomacy with each other.

Players from friendly or allied tribes can fight each other, but only to unconsciousness and without looting capability.

Players from rival tribes can fight each other to unconsciousness with partial loot to the victor. Potentially the amount of looting can be agreed upon by rival tribes. (Setting the amount of looting is not currently implemented, but it’s something I am considering).

Players from enemy tribes at war can fight to the death with full looting (Potentially tribe leaders can come to a looting agreement for this as well).

Tribal leaders can set what actions are acceptable by their tribe members, in effect determining the laws within each tribe. Even an evil tribe may have a set of lows for its members to follow in order to maintain civil trade and exchange with other tribes.

Two good tribes can not become enemies, they can become rivals at worst.

Breaking the rules agreed upon by your tribes is possible but will result in a warning. If you proceed to act after the warning, your character is set to full evil mode and your reputation, alignment and karma consequences will be severe.

But that’s not all….

A primary worry for players is that they will loose their gear or loot. Keep in mind that in Xsyon all armor and weapons can be crafted and are thus replaceable.

Regarding death by age, this will not occur in the Prelude. By the time any characters will age enough to reach a natural death there will be several (and I think very interesting) methods to deal with permanent death without character loss.

I hope that answers all the questions so far.

The above is a statment made by jookie which generated alot of enthusiasm about this game to a big portion of the current community who have paid for this game. I think the above should be updated so as to quite drawing people to this game with false promises. It is like opening a bank account under the assumption that you will recive a free $100.bucs only to find out that you have to pay $100.00 bucs and that in the small print it states we can change whatever we want when we want. No Refunds your money is now ours:<>

The above statment regarding in game pvp should be refitted stating that we do currently have safe zones untill end of prelude and potentially after as well as give players invulnrable status so that should you walk on their lands they may kill you without you being able to defend yourself.

[darth_vato]

Pick apart the arguement, dont' just say my opinion is right and your opinion is wrong. How is it the worst arguement? Working as intended seems very clear to me. Take off your emotional blinders for a few minutes.

Again, by definition, something that is working as intended, is not broken. Example(so you understand): A wheel rolls, so it is working as intended, but if the wheel is flat, it will not roll, so it is a broken mechanic.

If I walk into someone's house with a baseball bat, some mystical force won't be providing some sort of forcefield around my victims body before I smash his/her skull in.

Your argument is seriously flawed. The law may side with the land owner in real life, but who gives a shit? There aren't any cops in the game world. In fact, your argument doesn't even really refute the OP, but rather you just go on a tangent about how you couldn't actually fight back.

Uh, yeah you could. Newsflash, armed burglary/homicides happen every day. You'd be stupid not to realize how ridiculous your argument is.

[Dubanka]

1. Game is not "real" life.
2. Don't need a lesson on staying alive in a Pvp game. As a Vietnam Vet, I have more than enough experience with real PvP.

The issue is safe zones, and what transpires within them from a Pvp perspective. The game has rules in that regard to limit and dissuade pvp in safe zones during Pvp. End of story.

1. Not Real life? Really? Thanks. Wasn't aware of that. Your point was helpful.
2. Great. Thanks for your service. Please see point #1. RL pvp experience should have no bearing on in game experience (you taught me that).

No, it's not the end of the story...since it has been stated they will be removed...in as much as they are working as intended i actually don't have much issue with them. The end of the story, is for players to stop crying about someone hitting them in the face...when it is entirely within their ability to use the mechanics present in the game to game themselves pvp free...if that is what they want.

[Eremon]

This is about people being able to defend themselves if attacked.

I know what the thread is about, and I know the argument you're trying to make. Your contention that the "combat mechanics" within a safe zone (defenders inability to defend themselves) is "broken" is incorrect. It is functioning precisely in the way it was intended to function.

What you're lobbying for, is a change of the game rules, because you don't like the rules... plain and simple.

[Chevron]

The main argument is the fact that the devs are giving people invulnrable status while still allowing them to kill other players. It is a ridiculous game mechanic that is not advertised but is kept under the books due to it being a major flaw because of the ineptness at being able to create a working flag system. If this mechanic alone were presented during a review of the game there would be far less interested people.

This thread as had alot of attention..its time the devs step forward with an updated Combat & consequenses game feature list that does not give a bait and switch. I would like the devs to come forward and please respond to this thread.

[Eremon]

RL pvp experience should have no bearing on in game experience (you taught me that).


It does in the context of situational awareness and knowing your enemy. It also is beneficial in the areas of tactics and strategy. That was the only point I was making with that reference.

[Eremon]

It is a ridiculous game mechanic that is not advertised but is kept under the books due to it being a major flaw because of the ineptness at being able to create a working flag system.

The "ineptness" reference is speculation on your part. It seems pretty obvious (and logical) to me why this system is the way it is for the Prelude period. It facilitates the world-building element of the game.

[Proto]

Nothing stops you from being good :) Its just a setting on a tribe :) If you cannot do the time, dont do the crime :)

It seems to me that the whole point of even having good and evil alignments is so that they feed off of one another...you know, fight, no holds barred and see who comes out on top, with equal footing.

[Proto]

It discourages trespassing, plain and simple. Changing it will only encourage idiots to come waltzing into another tribe's safe zone for the sole purpose of pissing off that tribe and getting them to attack.

No one is forcing you to trespass and no one is forcing the tribe to attack trespassers.

Why even bother having pvp in the game then? Why bother marketing the game as a post apocalyptic setting when virtually nothing that would happen in a post apocalyptic world is possible?

[Proto]

I am sorely disappointed to see all the apologists in this thread. This is clearly a broken mechanic.

The attacker must be flagged to the victim. No one should be able to kill another player with 0 risk, the thought of it is absurdly imbalanced and unfair. Never have I seen a mechanic such as this in my long MMO career dating back to MUDs.

A good and succinct post.

[Chevron]

agree with the above

[Proto]

double post ugh...

You should be more concerned with the shitty trespassing analogy you made than the double post.

[orious13]

Why even bother having pvp in the game then? Why bother marketing the game as a post apocalyptic setting when virtually nothing that would happen in a post apocalyptic world is possible?

No one knows what would happen in such a world.
Right now the focus of the game is to build a foundation for the game's future.
If you're joining the game at this time strictly for pvp, you might have a problem :/.
But whether the system is working as intended or not, only the devs can say.

lol and jeebus use the edit button.

[Proto]

If I understand you correctly, you're referring to the fact that the devs want to remove the safezones after the "Prelude" period. And you do have a good point. The no-griefing zones are temporary features set up to give the world-builders a head start. Anyone who does not have their house in order and their defenses secured by the time pvp rules are relaxed post-Prelude is in for a world of hurt. And I am looking forward to the challenge of defending society against the forces of chaos. :)

This is really what us members of the Shadowbane community are waiting with baited breath for. We're all for the random open world pvp, that suits us just fine, we're used to random 1v1 battles and whatnot, but our forte is group versus group city seiging, we did it for years, we have the organization, the know-how and the will to ensure that war turns in our favor.

Frankly, people will wish that they were stuck with random griefing, the tears over that won't compare to those that come from their precious city being reduced to rubble and ash.

[Proto]

No one knows what would happen in such a world.
Right now the focus of the game is to build a foundation for the game's future.
If you're joining the game at this time strictly for pvp, you might have a problem :/.
But whether the system is working as intended or not, only the devs can say.

lol and jeebus use the edit button.

It's pretty easy to anticipate what would happen with a high degree of certainty in a post apoc scenario, especially on a macro scale. I'm not sure if you're from the US, but an easy case study is post-Katrina New Orleans, and that would be just the tip of the iceberg.

And edit button???

[Caffy]

There are many mechanics not in/working atm that will all affect PvP and so to get all up in heat about this mechanic needing to be fixed now is silly. I would rather see them get the world mostly stable and lagfree first then start implementing their game mechanics/tools as they move closer towards launch (cause this game is definitely still beta at most.)

Seems like the OP is mostly concerned that he can't grief someone properly, tho since is it really that hard to notice "Im on someone's land and they are running to attack me..." hmmm maybe if I want to fight back I should get off their land first then see what happens. giving the totem area as safe to players (at the moment) allows people to play without being griefed repeatedly on their lands. So you might not like the mechanic but if you want to PvP at the moment do it off people lands since you are helpless on their land (broken or not.)

[orious13]

It's pretty easy to anticipate what would happen with a high degree of certainty in a post apoc scenario, especially on a macro scale. I'm not sure if you're from the US, but an easy case study is post-Katrina New Orleans, and that would be just the tip of the iceberg.

And edit button???

But the twist here is that everyone has lost their memories.

Edit button is left of reply and reply with quote.

[Dubanka]

But the twist here is that everyone has lost their memories.

as a species we're highly social, highly intelligent, and highly agressive...when you dump in a limited supply of stuff you need to stay alive, its kinda obvious how it's going to play out.

[Proto]

But the twist here is that everyone has lost their memories.

Edit button is left of reply and reply with quote.

Memory or not, people still retain survival instincts; after a crisis event occurs instincts take over for educational accumen.

I'm just curious as to why you mentioned the edit button.

[Chevron]

There are many mechanics not in/working atm that will all affect PvP and so to get all up in heat about this mechanic needing to be fixed now is silly. I would rather see them get the world mostly stable and lagfree first then start implementing their game mechanics/tools as they move closer towards launch (cause this game is definitely still beta at most.)

Seems like the OP is mostly concerned that he can't grief someone properly, tho since is it really that hard to notice "Im on someone's land and they are running to attack me..." hmmm maybe if I want to fight back I should get off their land first then see what happens. giving the totem area as safe to players (at the moment) allows people to play without being griefed repeatedly on their lands. So you might not like the mechanic but if you want to PvP at the moment do it off people lands since you are helpless on their land (broken or not.)

This thread is not about wanting to grief people.

It is about a major broken game mechanic that gives people invulnrabilty while they may still kill and loot you. It is ridiculous to keep it the way it is. It is an appaling feature at best.

Greifing is not the definition of self-defense by the way.

[orious13]

Well of course you're going to want to survive. But you're not going to just attack everyone you see without reason. Before I was saying one's actions with a full memory of the world around them may not be the same as one who has no memory of the world around them. That's why theories or assumptions based on our own knowledge may include differing outcomes. You can say "well if I had no memory", but that won't work because you do have that memory and knowledge consciously and subconsciously.

You had like 3 posts. Never seen that before on here or other forums for that matter unless someone's bumping. People usually just edit and enter another quote. Just seemed clueless looking.

[Chavoda]

This thread still ongoing? recap?

..yes it will change in time, when the devs have time for it.. No its not stupit. it stops a lot of nasty way to stop harassment. , read all eleven pages in order to find some but not all are mention yet.

It works fine for now, avoid tribe / homesteads if you feel insecure about your own ability to survive , funny fact of this thread Both the groups that are known to be "evil" ("gankers") and known to be "good" ("carebears")agree that its fine enough for now. just some random posters who do not read everything keep bumping this darn thread along whit the thread starter who cant let it go and keeps repeating himself.

[Proto]

Well of course you're going to want to survive. But you're not going to just attack everyone you see without reason. Before I was saying one's actions with a full memory of the world around them may not be the same as one who has no memory of the world around them. That's why theories or assumptions based on our own knowledge may include differing outcomes. You can say "well if I had no memory", but that won't work because you do have that memory and knowledge consciously and subconsciously.

You had like 3 posts. Never seen that before on here or other forums for that matter unless someone's bumping. People usually just edit and enter another quote. Just seemed clueless looking.

I read a post and answered it, read another post and answered it, read another post and answered it. No reason, nor would I ever have even entertained the thought of wasting time editing in quotes into 1 post when 3 does just fine.

[orious13]

I read a post and answered it, read another post and answered it, read another post and answered it. No reason, nor would I ever have even entertained the thought of wasting time editing in quotes into 1 post when 3 does just fine.

lol.. well to each his own I guess.

I just like structure and consolidation. I would have said why post 3 times when I could just post 1 time. Cleaner on the forums.

[Proto]

This thread still ongoing? recap?

..yes it will change in time, when the devs have time for it.. No its not stupit. it stops a lot of nasty way to stop harassment. , read all eleven pages in order to find some but not all are mention yet.

It works fine for now, avoid tribe / homesteads if you feel insecure about your own ability to survive , funny fact of this thread Both the groups that are known to be "evil" ("gankers") and known to be "good" ("carebears")agree that its fine enough for now. just some random posters who do not read everything keep bumping this darn thread along whit the thread starter who cant let it go and keeps repeating himself.

The problem imo, with those people who are in disagreement with the OP, is that they have a very narrow view of the problem.

There's a very real problem with combat in and of itself, it's not a measured art, people are making tiny toons exclusively for the purposes to avoid being hit and it's working as in order to hit someone you have to be very precise, unfortunately the game mechanics don't lend themselves well to precision. This becomes a problem especially when near the edges of a territory. Say for example, you're near the edge of enemy territory (especially if you're unaware that the territory has been claimed) and you engage in battle; regardless of who starts this fight, imagine that you get a whack in, he gets a whack in and in the heat of the moment (or a bout of cowardice) the guy with the home turf decides to exploit the mentioned safezone mechanic and steps a foot backwards into his zone. Given the current poor implementation of the territory notification and the current poor combat system, it is often too difficult to tell whether or not you're just plain missing the guy, or if you're in his safezone during a fight.

I mean let's be honest, hitting someone in this game isn't the easiest feat in the world, nor is it the best system to tell you when you've entered a safehold, both of these make it too easy to exploit the safe zone mechanic and that is why it's broken.

[Proto]

lol.. well to each his own I guess.

I just like structure and consolidation. I would have said why post 3 times when I could just post 1 time. Cleaner on the forums.

Yeah, I've never really concerned myself with clean and tidy forums, I have a natural aversion to order.

[Chevron]

The problem imo, with those people who are in disagreement with the OP, is that they have a very narrow view of the problem.

There's a very real problem with combat in and of itself, it's not a measured art, people are making tiny toons exclusively for the purposes to avoid being hit and it's working as in order to hit someone you have to be very precise, unfortunately the game mechanics don't lend themselves well to precision. This becomes a problem especially when near the edges of a territory. Say for example, you're near the edge of enemy territory (especially if you're unaware that the territory has been claimed) and you engage in battle; regardless of who starts this fight, imagine that you get a whack in, he gets a whack in and in the heat of the moment (or a bout of cowardice) the guy with the home turf decides to exploit the mentioned safezone mechanic and steps a foot backwards into his zone. Given the current poor implementation of the territory notification and the current poor combat system, it is often too difficult to tell whether or not you're just plain missing the guy, or if you're in his safezone during a fight.

I mean let's be honest, hitting someone in this game isn't the easiest feat in the world, nor is it the best system to tell you when you've entered a safehold, both of these make it too easy to exploit the safe zone mechanic and that is why it's broken.

/signed

[Fahadius]

The problem imo, with those people who are in disagreement with the OP, is that they have a very narrow view of the problem.

There's a very real problem with combat in and of itself, it's not a measured art, people are making tiny toons exclusively for the purposes to avoid being hit and it's working as in order to hit someone you have to be very precise, unfortunately the game mechanics don't lend themselves well to precision. This becomes a problem especially when near the edges of a territory. Say for example, you're near the edge of enemy territory (especially if you're unaware that the territory has been claimed) and you engage in battle; regardless of who starts this fight, imagine that you get a whack in, he gets a whack in and in the heat of the moment (or a bout of cowardice) the guy with the home turf decides to exploit the mentioned safezone mechanic and steps a foot backwards into his zone. Given the current poor implementation of the territory notification and the current poor combat system, it is often too difficult to tell whether or not you're just plain missing the guy, or if you're in his safezone during a fight.

I mean let's be honest, hitting someone in this game isn't the easiest feat in the world, nor is it the best system to tell you when you've entered a safehold, both of these make it too easy to exploit the safe zone mechanic and that is why it's broken.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

[jcapde]

Works fine. If you're too lazy to run around their territory, you deserve to get ganked. It's called their 'territory' for a reason.

So then I should find a natural choke point, set up camp there and God-Mode gank anyone who has no choice but to walk through it?
This mechanic is very easily exploitable, I don't like it.

[DaAzub]

Care Bears

[Proto]

So then I should find a natural choke point, set up camp there and God-Mode gank anyone who has no choice but to walk through it?
This mechanic is very easily exploitable, I don't like it.

Or simply just set up in the middle of a garbage pile.

[Chavoda]

So then I should find a natural choke point, set up camp there and God-Mode gank anyone who has no choice but to walk through it?
This mechanic is very easily exploitable, I don't like it.


there are no choke points at all in the game. just 5 min detours.

[Doc]

It seems to me that the whole point of even having good and evil alignments is so that they feed off of one another...you know, fight, no holds barred and see who comes out on top, with equal footing.

Not really, its supposed to be 80% good/neutral and 20% evil. Need to have disatvatages to being evil, alignment wont be just cosmetics i sincelrely hope. Rebuilding the world is focus, PvP is not, nor is PvP driving force for the game.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/01/06/massively-exclusive-jordi-grau-davis-answers-our-xsyon-question/

Recently there seems to be a bit of a trend toward independently produced open-world games with sandbox elements and a heavy focus on PVP. What sets your game apart from titles like Darkfall (http://darkfallonline.com/) or Mortal Online (http://mortalonline.com/)? Do you see PvP conflict as the driving force behind Xsyon?

What sets Xsyon apart is a focus on building and creating a new world and not relying on PvP as the driving force. The Xsyon setting is also based on reality and not a fantasy universe. This gives us the opportunity to introduce real locations and later historical lore to make Xsyon a somewhat educational experience.

Following on from that, both Darkfall (http://massively.joystiq.com/category/darkfall) and Mortal Online (http://massively.joystiq.com/category/mortal-online) have attracted what many people consider to be undesirable communities (griefers, etc). Are there any mechanics in Xsyon created to keep anti-social behavior in check or is it truly up to the players and 'anything goes?'

In Xsyon, tribe zones are safe zones. While wilderness areas will be mostly anything goes, encumbrance limits will prevent extensive looting and mechanisms are in place to prevent camping spawn locations. The goal is to have open PvP in general but not cater to griefer types.


Why even bother having pvp in the game then? Why bother marketing the game as a post apocalyptic setting when virtually nothing that would happen in a post apocalyptic world is possible?

You been to apocalypse so you know? I say apocalypse=everyone is dead, so how do we play that one. Ooooor, how would you account gods and magic, was that also supposed to happen in your apocalypse?


as a species we're highly social, highly intelligent, and highly agressive...when you dump in a limited supply of stuff you need to stay alive, its kinda obvious how it's going to play out.


Memory or not, people still retain survival instincts; after a crisis event occurs instincts take over for educational accumen.

Its very weird and selective apocalypse, maybe it weeded out all psycopaths, overly agressive people...theres nothing scientific about Xsyons apocalypse. from main page:

"War has ravaged the planet, opening a rift to another reality.The survivors of the grisly destruction rise from the ashes of ruin to encounter a world that has changed. A world that once existed only in the realm of mythology, legend and imagination has become concrete and very real...
With the disruption of the planet, ancient gods awake to once again exert their powers over the earth. The lords of nature have revived the wastelands, eradicating and subverting the remnants of modern technology. Creatures of mutation and mythology now populate the land. The ways of swords and sorcery have replaced the path of science and progress."


The problem imo, with those people who are in disagreement with the OP, is that they have a very narrow view of the problem.

There's a very real problem with combat in and of itself, it's not a measured art, people are making tiny toons exclusively for the purposes to avoid being hit and it's working as in order to hit someone you have to be very precise, unfortunately the game mechanics don't lend themselves well to precision. This becomes a problem especially when near the edges of a territory. Say for example, you're near the edge of enemy territory (especially if you're unaware that the territory has been claimed) and you engage in battle; regardless of who starts this fight, imagine that you get a whack in, he gets a whack in and in the heat of the moment (or a bout of cowardice) the guy with the home turf decides to exploit the mentioned safezone mechanic and steps a foot backwards into his zone. Given the current poor implementation of the territory notification and the current poor combat system, it is often too difficult to tell whether or not you're just plain missing the guy, or if you're in his safezone during a fight.

I mean let's be honest, hitting someone in this game isn't the easiest feat in the world, nor is it the best system to tell you when you've entered a safehold, both of these make it too easy to exploit the safe zone mechanic and that is why it's broken.

Dont be careless and fight on edge of someones safe zone. If you are unaware of your surroundings you deserve to lose, aint that mantra that you all like to chant to care-bears soooo much, suck-it up carebear :) I do agree though that theres very little feedback on safe-zone notification, but then, it makes you all that more careful. If someone manages to bait you to his safe zone... ;)


So then I should find a natural choke point, set up camp there and God-Mode gank anyone who has no choice but to walk through it?
This mechanic is very easily exploitable, I don't like it.

Yah, find a choke point and do just that, good luck.

EDIT: i just find all "apocalypose must look x way, you are doing it wrong" claims...amusing

[byrgar]

Just to make myself "Clear" this is NOT a thread about how there should or or should Not be SafeZones in the game.

This thread is about a broken game mechanic within the SafeZones.

I tested this in three diffrent tribe lands to be sure and found that if i walk on a tribes land they can attack me "Without" me provoking them or taking resources and yet they remain completly "INVULNRABLE" to my attacks so there is no self defense.

If this is the way it is supposed to be then it is an appaling game mechanic as the attacking party should at least become flagged to you so you may defend yourself.

Now i realise Fanboy trolls will say "Well then don't walk on a tribes land" but quite honestly how can you take away somones ability to defend themselves if they choose to run through somones land to cut off a 5-10 min walk around or more. I see plenty of tribes set up shop in valleys that will take a person even 20 mins to find a walk around.

I don't mind at all that somone can attack me for simply walking through their land but i should be able to defend myself.

This game mechanic needs serious discussion.

We need to hear the Devs come forward and justify Allowing someone to attack and loot you without provacation other then walking through their land while remaining completly invulnrable. I think we should receive a list of details explaining why this is being implemented as well as why no other alternatives will work.

Thoughts and opinions please.

I agree.

If I walk into another players, or tribe safezone and stupidly try to attack them, fair enough, I deserve to have my ass handed to me while they cannot be harmed.
But, if I wander into another players, or tribe safezone, do nothing and get randomly attacked, they should lose the safety aspect and take damage if I hit them back, especially if they are good aligned, as that should not be how they roll anyway.
The mechanic of the safezone definately needs to be looked at.

[Eremon]

It is about a major broken game mechanic that gives people invulnrabilty while they may still kill and loot you.

You continue this mantra that "it is about a broken game mechanic".... while completely ignoring the fact that it was designed to function the way it does, and is working as intended.

Whine about it, cry about it, lie on the floor kicking your feet about it, hold your breath til you turn blue about it... but it is "working as intended". Get over it.

[Doc]

I agree.

If I walk into another players, or tribe safezone and stupidly try to attack them, fair enough, I deserve to have my ass handed to me while they cannot be harmed.
But, if I wander into another players, or tribe safezone, do nothing and get randomly attacked, they should lose the safety aspect and take damage if I hit them back, especially if they are good aligned, as that should not be how they roll anyway.
The mechanic of the safezone definately needs to be looked at.

What are you doing on another tribes territory? And i hope alignment is in sooner rather than later, so if you are not evil you will have nothing to fear from good/neutral tribes.

[byrgar]

What are you doing on another tribes territory? And i hope alignment is in sooner rather than later, so if you are not evil you will have nothing to fear from good/neutral tribes.

Have you heard of trade? maybe I need to cross a section of another tribes safezone to get to my homestead, or, I could have been playing football and accidently kicked it over the fence.....
There are a lot of reasons why somebody *might* enter another tribes safezone, there really is no reason why somebody attacking for no reason should still be safe.
Maybe you are right, and alignment will solve the issue.

[Doc]

Have you heard of trade?

You might want to read back on this thread to see my stance on it.


maybe I need to cross a section of another tribes safezone to get to my homestead, or, I could have been playing football and accidently kicked it over the fence.....

Gonna have to be friends with them :) If you choose to pass through someones territory and you dont know them, you are aware of the risk.


There are a lot of reasons why somebody *might* enter another tribes safezone, there really is no reason why somebody attacking for no reason should still be safe.
Maybe you are right, and alignment will solve the issue.

Well, its not for no reason, its their territory and you conciously entered it with knowledge what might happen. If you dont trust them, or they gank you -> avoid. pretty simple.

[ifireallymust]

Have you heard of trade? maybe I need to cross a section of another tribes safezone to get to my homestead, or, I could have been playing football and accidently kicked it over the fence.....
There are a lot of reasons why somebody *might* enter another tribes safezone, there really is no reason why somebody attacking for no reason should still be safe.
Maybe you are right, and alignment will solve the issue.

Jeez, and people say I need to be more social in game. At least I know how to find a spot with good neighbors, and then be a good neighbor!

Everyone who is upset over not being able to defend yourself in another tribe's territory needs to join a big tribe with high, sturdy walls so you can lock yourself up smug and snug, lest your neighbor kill you as you are innocently passing through his territory picking wildflowers for your dear mum.

Not that I really think the people crying about this game mechanic are doing so because they're afraid of being ganked while innocently doing anything in another tribe's territory. Admit it, you just want to gang up with your friends to strip someone else's junkpile bare while they stand there and watch. Oh sure, you could wait until your victim is offline, but what would be the fun in that? It's much more enjoyable with tears and failed defense attempts that result in the repeated demise of the defender!

[Proto]

Not really, its supposed to be 80% good/neutral and 20% evil. Need to have disatvatages to being evil, alignment wont be just cosmetics i sincelrely hope. Rebuilding the world is focus, PvP is not, nor is PvP driving force for the game.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/01/06/massively-exclusive-jordi-grau-davis-answers-our-xsyon-question/

Recently there seems to be a bit of a trend toward independently produced open-world games with sandbox elements and a heavy focus on PVP. What sets your game apart from titles like Darkfall (http://darkfallonline.com/) or Mortal Online (http://mortalonline.com/)? Do you see PvP conflict as the driving force behind Xsyon?

What sets Xsyon apart is a focus on building and creating a new world and not relying on PvP as the driving force. The Xsyon setting is also based on reality and not a fantasy universe. This gives us the opportunity to introduce real locations and later historical lore to make Xsyon a somewhat educational experience.

Following on from that, both Darkfall (http://massively.joystiq.com/category/darkfall) and Mortal Online (http://massively.joystiq.com/category/mortal-online) have attracted what many people consider to be undesirable communities (griefers, etc). Are there any mechanics in Xsyon created to keep anti-social behavior in check or is it truly up to the players and 'anything goes?'

In Xsyon, tribe zones are safe zones. While wilderness areas will be mostly anything goes, encumbrance limits will prevent extensive looting and mechanisms are in place to prevent camping spawn locations. The goal is to have open PvP in general but not cater to griefer types.



You been to apocalypse so you know? I say apocalypse=everyone is dead, so how do we play that one. Ooooor, how would you account gods and magic, was that also supposed to happen in your apocalypse?





Its very weird and selective apocalypse, maybe it weeded out all psycopaths, overly agressive people...theres nothing scientific about Xsyons apocalypse. from main page:

"War has ravaged the planet, opening a rift to another reality.The survivors of the grisly destruction rise from the ashes of ruin to encounter a world that has changed. A world that once existed only in the realm of mythology, legend and imagination has become concrete and very real...
With the disruption of the planet, ancient gods awake to once again exert their powers over the earth. The lords of nature have revived the wastelands, eradicating and subverting the remnants of modern technology. Creatures of mutation and mythology now populate the land. The ways of swords and sorcery have replaced the path of science and progress."



Dont be careless and fight on edge of someones safe zone. If you are unaware of your surroundings you deserve to lose, aint that mantra that you all like to chant to care-bears soooo much, suck-it up carebear :) I do agree though that theres very little feedback on safe-zone notification, but then, it makes you all that more careful. If someone manages to bait you to his safe zone... ;)



Yah, find a choke point and do just that, good luck.

EDIT: i just find all "apocalypose must look x way, you are doing it wrong" claims...amusing

man your reply is just too full of shit to reply to this morning, just a bunch of half baked answers for the sake of replying to save face.

[Doc]

man your reply is just too full of shit to reply to this morning, just a bunch of half baked answers for the sake of replying to save face.

Half of my post are words from Jordi himself. You know, man who creates this game. *shrug*

[Proto]

Half of my post are words from Jordi himself. You know, man who creates this game. *shrug*

I'll get into your use of his words later, but more specifically I was referring to yours.

edit: If you couldn't figure out whose words I was referring to, you probably shouldn't even be using these forums.

Troll.

[Doc]

I'll get into your use of his words later, but more specifically I was referring to yours.

edit: If you couldn't figure out whose words I was referring to, you probably shouldn't even be using these forums.

Troll.

Aww, no name calling please, we are here to discuss. And i dont read minds sorry, "man your reply is just too full of shit" is referring to, well, reply, there is nothing pointing out any specific part of my reply, if you ment somethng else, well, you should be more specific next time. But, why im responding: because i do think what you have written is exactly what you ment, "man your reply is just too full of shit" with no specified parts that are or are not included in "full of shit".

[Chevron]

there are no choke points at all in the game. just 5 min detours.

There are 20 min detours...

[Chevron]

Jeez, and people say I need to be more social in game. At least I know how to find a spot with good neighbors, and then be a good neighbor!

Everyone who is upset over not being able to defend yourself in another tribe's territory needs to join a big tribe with high, sturdy walls so you can lock yourself up smug and snug, lest your neighbor kill you as you are innocently passing through his territory picking wildflowers for your dear mum.

Not that I really think the people crying about this game mechanic are doing so because they're afraid of being ganked while innocently doing anything in another tribe's territory. Admit it, you just want to gang up with your friends to strip someone else's junkpile bare while they stand there and watch. Oh sure, you could wait until your victim is offline, but what would be the fun in that? It's much more enjoyable with tears and failed defense attempts that result in the repeated demise of the defender!

What this guy says sums up how it is a broken mechanic.....find a tribe with walls and remain inside and don't go out...sounds like quite the game. This broken mechanic will create griefers to add to those already playing oppsed to actually detering anything

[Chevron]

Also people seem to miss the reality that with the rush of people come launch and the amount of land avaiable 80%-90% of the game world will be a tribes land ie safe zone and everyone will be forced to walk through constantly facing invulnrable people which again will create far more griefing oppsed to dettering anything. The current rep system and flagging system as well as notification of who is good and eveil has not even been tested. We do not know if it even works. It is set for fail.

[byrgar]

Jeez, and people say I need to be more social in game. At least I know how to find a spot with good neighbors, and then be a good neighbor!

Everyone who is upset over not being able to defend yourself in another tribe's territory needs to join a big tribe with high, sturdy walls so you can lock yourself up smug and snug, lest your neighbor kill you as you are innocently passing through his territory picking wildflowers for your dear mum.

Not that I really think the people crying about this game mechanic are doing so because they're afraid of being ganked while innocently doing anything in another tribe's territory. Admit it, you just want to gang up with your friends to strip someone else's junkpile bare while they stand there and watch. Oh sure, you could wait until your victim is offline, but what would be the fun in that? It's much more enjoyable with tears and failed defense attempts that result in the repeated demise of the defender!

haha, such a witty response, shame it is completely wrong though.
I actually do not have an issue at all with the tribe next to me and their safezone, I have no desire to strip their junk pile bare, or anyone else's for that matter, I do have a wish to see more of the landscape than just my little homestead, and while I am out and about exploring, looking over my shoulder for *evil* players, I really do not want to have to wonder if that player who has a good aligned totem is going to do the same as the *evil* player would, just for shits and giggles because I am in his safezone and cannot hit back.
I could say something like, Admit it, you just want to be able to gank people with no risk while standing in your safezone, but I will refrain from doing so.

[Dontaze_Mebro]

I can easily drop a homestead totem right before i murder someone. They won't be able to hit me back. System is flawed. Either make it so no one can hit anyone, or make it so you can defend yourself if attacked. Why the argument of people stealing is of concern I don't know. You can set basket permissions.

[mrcalhou]

vaporware.

Orlynaoh?

[maelwydd]

I can easily drop a homestead totem right before i murder someone. They won't be able to hit me back. System is flawed. Either make it so no one can hit anyone, or make it so you can defend yourself if attacked. Why the argument of people stealing is of concern I don't know. You can set basket permissions.

You can only do that every 6 hours....I don't think it is much to worry about plus they can simply run out of the area and hit you back

[Jadzia]

I still don't understand the concerns. If an evil player attacks you in his tribe area you are able to fight back. If a good one does the same without you being flagged for stealing he will lose his alignment and you'll be able to fight back, if not instantly then after 1-2 kills. No good player would risk losing his safe zone for an easy kill. If he have wanted to do that he would have chosen evil on the first place.

If you are flagged for stealing the area owner has the right to kill you. Without this mechanic small tribes and solo players wouldn't have any chance to protect their resources inside their area. 5-10 players would just run in, grab all the resources there and walk away.

[Chevron]

I still don't understand the concerns. If an evil player attacks you in his tribe area you are able to fight back. If a good one does the same without you being flagged for stealing he will lose his alignment and you'll be able to fight back, if not instantly then after 1-2 kills. No good player would risk losing his safe zone for an easy kill. If he have wanted to do that he would have chosen evil on the first place.

If you are flagged for stealing the area owner has the right to kill you. Without this mechanic small tribes and solo players wouldn't have any chance to protect their resources inside their area. 5-10 players would just run in, grab all the resources there and walk away.

That is not true. It is not specified how many kills it will take to loose notariety and they have not even tested their not and flagging system which considering what else doesn't work is quite scary huh?

The fact that i can be attacked and not defend myself is an appaling thought

[Jadzia]

That is not true. It is not specified how many kills it will take to loose notariety and they have not even tested their not and flagging system which considering what else doesn't work is quite scary huh?

The fact that i can be attacked and not defend myself is an appaling thought

I know its not working now, but it should be by launch. If it was working properly and good players would lose alignment after 1-2 kills (good/neutral victims), would you be satisfied with the system ?

[Zephyr]

The fact that i can be attacked and not defend myself is an appaling thought

You can defend yourself by not going into their territory.

[maelwydd]

You can defend yourself by not going into their territory.

100% true

[Dontaze_Mebro]

You can defend yourself by not going into their territory.
So no one should bother trying to do totem missions for fear of being ganked on delivery?

[maelwydd]

So no one should bother trying to do totem missions for fear of being ganked on delivery?

The only people who would fear entering another tribes land are those that have reason to fear doing so.

For example, I wandered into an area of a tribe and they contronted me, we talked, I informed them I ment them no harm and stated I can as a friend to trade. We spoke, traded and I left. I now return to them from time to time to trade or chat, they know who I am and I am free to wander across their land.

the only reason you think this is a broken mechanic is because you have not taken the time to find the social solution to the mechanic.

Again, the only people who need fear this mechanic are those who bring a reason with them into enemy territory. Communication and accepting responsibility for the consequences of your actions are a far better defence.

[Doc]

So no one should bother trying to do totem missions for fear of being ganked on delivery?

If the tribe is known for ganking/griefing, KOS everything, no.

But my guesstimate is there will be quite a few tribes that will welcome people for trade, quests, and just chat, and will let you pass through if you are in good relations with the tribe, or, well, just dont cause any trouble on tribe territory (or in open world). You reap what you sow.

I like the mechanic, it has certain...community building...quality...attached to it.

[Proto]

I know its not working now, but it should be by launch. If it was working properly and good players would lose alignment after 1-2 kills (good/neutral victims), would you be satisfied with the system ?

Not really, I'd be satisfied with a system of word of mouth good and evil players or tribes, not some arbitrary mechanic.

[Fahadius]

I don't care where you're at in-game, if a player attacks you, you should be able to defend yourself. It's a horribly stupid mechanic that even non-pvp players should be offended by. Hell, I could live with people on tribe-land getting massive combat bonuses against those who are trespassing, but I should still be able to defend myself if Sally McCrafter decides to hit me in the head with a shovel because I was walking across her lawn. I know one less person in this game won't matter, but honestly, if it stays this way then I won't be playing at launch - voting with my wallet is the only option.

[ifireallymust]

haha, such a witty response, shame it is completely wrong though.
I actually do not have an issue at all with the tribe next to me and their safezone, I have no desire to strip their junk pile bare, or anyone else's for that matter, I do have a wish to see more of the landscape than just my little homestead, and while I am out and about exploring, looking over my shoulder for *evil* players, I really do not want to have to wonder if that player who has a good aligned totem is going to do the same as the *evil* player would, just for shits and giggles because I am in his safezone and cannot hit back.
I could say something like, Admit it, you just want to be able to gank people with no risk while standing in your safezone, but I will refrain from doing so.

I'm just speaking from my own experience after wandering all over the game world for more hours than I'm going to admit to. People haven't lurked around their homesteads and tribelands waiting for me to step in so they can gank me. It has not happened even one time that I was passing through someone's area and got attacked. Not once. Maybe I've just been really lucky?

[ifireallymust]

I don't care where you're at in-game, if a player attacks you, you should be able to defend yourself. It's a horribly stupid mechanic that even non-pvp players should be offended by. Hell, I could live with people on tribe-land getting massive combat bonuses against those who are trespassing, but I should still be able to defend myself if Sally McCrafter decides to hit me in the head with a shovel because I was walking across her lawn. I know one less person in this game won't matter, but honestly, if it stays this way then I won't be playing at launch - voting with my wallet is the only option.

Hate to double post, but this is another valid way to go about it, some point down the line, anyway, after more important issues are taken care of.

And I bloody well will brain you with my shovel if you start scavanging off my tiny junk pile (unless you ask first, in which case I'll probably say 'go ahead' and carry on with whatever I'm doing).