PvP with extreme consequences: Would you enjoy it?

[StarvingSteve]

This question is mainly for the PvP / conquest crowd:

Would you still enjoy unrestricted PvP if it had extreme consequences for all players, like perma death and settlements getting completely burned to the ground? Or do you think this gets in the way of having "fun" by simply running around and fighting each other?

The basic concept is simple: Realism. There are barely any restrictions at all, but the game mechanics make sure that war and violence are just as devastating as in RL. If you go to war, you'll probably get killed sooner or later, and that was that. Two tribes escalating war might completely wipe each other off the map. Naturally, you should really really know what you're doing when starting a fight, or your PvP-fun will be kinda short-lived. This is also how the amount of wars and crime is balanced: It's very risky and only pays off in certain situations. Well, you get the idea.


A little background:
I made this poll a while ago, suggesting a similar system of extreme consequences used by Haven & Hearth and Salem. Apparently, most players didn't like it much, but few posted their reasons. Also, all the confusion about Xyson's PvP rendered the poll kinda invalid anyway...
http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/4048-FFA-PvP-should-be-like-quot-Salem-quot

[NexAnima]

I would support a perma death system that allowed unrestricted PVP.

[baka77]

I'm ok with cities being razed, so long as they can be rebuilt in a reasonable amount of time (not like 1 day, but like over a week or two).

Perma death, I've always had a problem with it. Here's why. There is no way to account for lag spikes, varying pings, & other technical "glitches" that could potentially allow someone to lose a fight they might have otherwise won. If everyone was on the exact same connection & if it was 100% stable 100% of the time & if there were no exploits & if there were no cheaters/hackers, then I'd be more ok with perma death. However, those are a lot of "if's" & no game to date has been able to resolve all of them.

That said, there should be serious consequences for death. Corpse looting & long walks back from your totem seem a decent place to start, though they're not as hardcore as they could be.

[Yuyito]

No smart developer would allow such harsh death penalties as "perma-death". The VAST majority of the gaming public does not like such harsh penalties and would vote with their wallets. At the end of the day, MMOs are there to make $$$. No paying clients = no money. Simple as that.

[Salvadore]

Unrestricted pvp? Absolutely! It has to be balanced though. That, of course, encompases a mutual cohesion between risk and reward.

Permadeath - Unfortunately, I simply cannot think or have ever seen a mechanic involving this that actually WORKS in a game. I think it is waaaay to harsh. Baka77 made my point already with Technical Difficulties. I could maybe see permadeath of a toon via old age, like what has been discussed here already, but it seems to me that it would be counterproductive to the game. For the time it takes to skill up a toon and get equipment/towns built, a single accidental death via bear by a lost connection is completely counterproductive.

I simply do not think permadeath can work in a system, but would I try it anyway...absolutely!

Asset destruction - Have posted many times involving this and I fully support it. This game has a massively in-depth building system. With proper asset destruction, towns would be built with defense in mind, politics get a higher interest, tribes try harder to keep what they have and fight fanatically to defend it. It only adds playability imo. Again, stressing balance here.

[StarvingSteve]

The VAST majority of the gaming public does not like such harsh penalties and would vote with their wallets.

Agree, but when you mention "perma death" to the vast majory of gamers, they will think of their lvl 80 WoW char with all epic gear permanently dying in a boss battle, and instantly faint. Obviously, it would indeed suck in WoW.
And Xsyon won't be a game for the vast majory of gamers, anyway, at least not anytime soon.

[Dubanka]

This question is mainly for the PvP / conquest crowd:

Would you still enjoy unrestricted PvP if it had extreme consequences for all players, like perma death and settlements getting completely burned to the ground? Or do you think this gets in the way of having "fun" by simply running around and fighting each other?

The basic concept is simple: Realism. There are barely any restrictions at all, but the game mechanics make sure that war and violence are just as devastating as in RL. If you go to war, you'll probably get killed sooner or later, and that was that. Two tribes escalating war might completely wipe each other off the map. Naturally, you should really really know what you're doing when starting a fight, or your PvP-fun will be kinda short-lived. This is also how the amount of wars and crime is balanced: It's very risky and only pays off in certain situations. Well, you get the idea.


A little background:
I made this poll a while ago, suggesting a similar system of extreme consequences used by Haven & Hearth and Salem. Apparently, most players didn't like it much, but few posted their reasons. Also, all the confusion about Xyson's PvP rendered the poll kinda invalid anyway...
http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/4048-FFA-PvP-should-be-like-quot-Salem-quot

inorder for pvp system to work, it has to have very real consequences for actions. It also has to give the player the ability to recover for reaping the results...negatively...of their actions. Too much 'consequence' ...they just leave. Too little, and it doesn't provide the right feeling of gain or loss.

there will always be a hard core group of players that say, HELL YEAH, unfortunately, they typically arent' big enough to pay anyone's mortgage.

[NexAnima]

No smart developer would allow such harsh death penalties as "perma-death". The VAST majority of the gaming public does not like such harsh penalties and would vote with their wallets. At the end of the day, MMOs are there to make $$$. No paying clients = no money. Simple as that.

Which is why in the end we will never see a true sandbox.

But on that note, What a about a semi-full death system. The name needs work but bare with me. What if, when you died due to a player's hand. The penalty would be so strict it would almost feel as though it was perma? Unprecedented stat loss and skill loss but its temporary. Not by 5 minutes but like 5 hours, what kind of impact would that have on the decision to PvP? Would PvPers ragequit or risk it for the glory? Would this impact war-pacts? Would it add fear to the world? Would this create peace treaties and foreign policy?

[Dubanka]

Which is why in the end we will never see a true sandbox.

But on that note, What a about a semi-full death system. The name needs work but bare with me. What if, when you died due to a player's hand. The penalty would be so strict it would almost feel as though it was perma? Unprecedented stat loss and skill loss but its temporary. Not by 5 minutes but like 5 hours, what kind of impact would that have on the decision to PvP? Would PvPers ragequit or risk it for the glory? Would this impact war-pacts? Would it add fear to the world? Would this create peace treaties and foreign policy?

The more you increase the risk of dying, the greater degree we'll go to ensure we don't die.
Hi-penalty pvp only ensures that when it does happens, it is horrible unfair.

it's fairly humorous listening to non-pvp players talk about designing a pvp system. It's like a baker telling a mechanic how to rebuild an engine.

[NexAnima]

The more you increase the risk of dying, the greater degree we'll go to ensure we don't die.
Hi-penalty pvp only ensures that when it does happens, it is horrible unfair.

it's fairly humorous listening to non-pvp players talk about designing a pvp system. It's like a baker telling a mechanic how to rebuild an engine.

Unfair to who? The one who thought he could win when attempting to kill a player harvesting or the one harvesting without any protection in a harsh world? Isn't the greatest insurance of survival determining if the target is worth the attempt?

Perhaps that baker owned a bodyshop as a prior profession?

[StarvingSteve]

The more you increase the risk of dying, the greater degree we'll go to ensure we don't die.
Hi-penalty pvp only ensures that when it does happens, it is horrible unfair.

True - but if now and then something horrible and unfair happens, it will not go unnoticed. The tribe will be branded as a potential danger by everybody else. Better attack them before they attack you.

I guess some of you know the notorious griefer-guild "Goon Squad". Haven & Hearth is the only game where their devision switched from being trouble-makers to crushing trouble-makers. They're basically running the trade hub and playing the police now. Priceless!

[Dubanka]

unfair in that ther ewould be no fight engaged upon that didn't have the absolute certainty of winning.

[NexAnima]

unfair in that ther ewould be no fight engaged upon that didn't have the absolute certainty of winning.

What's wrong with that? That's how life functions and the fact is, nothing is ever certain not even the obvious.

[Bear5732]

Perma death, I've always had a problem with it. Here's why. There is no way to account for lag spikes, varying pings, & other technical "glitches" that could potentially allow someone to lose a fight they might have otherwise won. If everyone was on the exact same connection & if it was 100% stable 100% of the time & if there were no exploits & if there were no cheaters/hackers, then I'd be more ok with perma death. However, those are a lot of "if's" & no game to date has been able to resolve all of them.



This is totally the correct answer to perma-death. Nothing would induce more game quitting rage then losing your 3 month old character to a glitch/lag spike/stuck/ bug etc. or losing your tribal lands because everyone in your tribe has to work a real life job.

I am all for their original idea of having characters age and eventually have to retire/die - (roughly 3 years playing time is what I heard)

I think the fact that you can lose hours and hours of travel time, as well as all your items - not to mention stat loss - is pretty hardcore - asking for more is just asking for an empty server in my decades of gaming opinion.

[orious13]

The only good perma-death I've seen is the Jedi death in SWG... something that made freakin sense to balance the universe.

[StarvingSteve]

The only good perma-death I've seen is the Jedi death in SWG... something that made freakin sense to balance the universe.

Oh, i didn't even know about that... how did that work in SWG?

[Larsa]

Personally, I'd like permadeath, but I can't see it happen.

Many of the PvPers play these games for combat activities alone, when you take that away they will leave. Permadeath is a great RP-tool in that it makes sure that combat takes place in the context of the game, for a cause. But that also means that combat will happen infrequently - and since many people (I'm not one of them) enjoy combat above all they will just leave the game.

[orious13]

Oh, i didn't even know about that... how did that work in SWG?

You unlocked a force sensitive character slot...
...bounty hunter class actually hunted jedi characters...
....if your force sensitive character jedi died... it really died.

It was a long time ago. They changed it before the first CU stuff happened.

[mrcalhou]

I do not support perma-death, but I do support heavy item destruction like in Eve-Online.

[Dubanka]

What's wrong with that? That's how life functions and the fact is, nothing is ever certain not even the obvious.

Life sucks. This is a game. It's supposed to be fun. If the game sucks, it wont be fun, no one will play and the devs will go broke and lose their houses.

[Salvadore]

Personally, I'd like permadeath, but I can't see it happen.

Many of the PvPers play these games for combat activities alone, when you take that away they will leave. Permadeath is a great RP-tool in that it makes sure that combat takes place in the context of the game, for a cause. But that also means that combat will happen infrequently - and since many people (I'm not one of them) enjoy combat above all they will just leave the game.

What about the hardcore crafter that ventured out and got killed by a bear? No combat there really, but permadeath? Said crafter may have totally avoided pvp in any facet but still is permadead...

I just dont think it could work.

[ifireallymust]

I want permadeath and pvp. I'm all for it. Tear down the safe zones, that's fine with me, but for those who want to kill inside what used to be a safe zone, you should be under threat of permadeath from then on, and unable to trade with or associate with anyone who isn't, so that even if you zerg and torment your neighbors for miles around, you'll always live in some fear, because you'll know that all it takes is one death, and that character is finished.

Oh, and I would play as a tribal area PKer under permadeath.

It would actually be a challenge, instead of the sorry excuse for lame no challenge you PKer zergs have now. I feel sorry for any of you who think the pvp mechanics in any game are challenging or fun. It's all watered down wuss play. You want a real challenge, know that when you screw up, you're starting over from scratch. Every time.

[NexAnima]

What about the hardcore crafter that ventured out and got killed by a bear? No combat there really, but permadeath? Said crafter may have totally avoided pvp in any facet but still is permadead...

I just dont think it could work.

It could be coded so that npcs just knock you out, while players kill you. If it became the norm to have perma-death players would adjust and play carefully, and all these artificial checks and balances would no longer be needed. If we were to ever have another server I would really like to see them test this theory out. The thought of losing all your hard work is scary, but at the same time would change your entire gaming experiance.

[wolfmoonstrike]

I want permadeath and pvp. I'm all for it. Tear down the safe zones, that's fine with me, but for those who want to kill inside what used to be a safe zone, you should be under threat of permadeath from then on, and unable to trade with or associate with anyone who isn't, so that even if you zerg and torment your neighbors for miles around, you'll always live in some fear, because you'll know that all it takes is one death, and that character is finished.

Oh, and I would play as a tribal area PKer under permadeath.

It would actually be a challenge, instead of the sorry excuse for lame no challenge you PKer zergs have now. I feel sorry for any of you who think the pvp mechanics in any game are challenging or fun. It's all watered down wuss play. You want a real challenge, know that when you screw up, you're starting over from scratch. Every time.

I honestly believe if permadeath is to be included we need a watered down perma death and it apply equally to all those killed by players. I'll explain.

Lets say player A dies due to player B, well I think he should have the choice to be reincarnated which will knock down his current skills to half of what they are now (but not below 5 per skill) or wait for a tribe member(or nice guy) to revive him with magic. It keeps things strict and has consequences, but not to the point where you can't earn back what you've lost.

The reason why you should apply equally to all players is so that way crafters will take their defenses more seriously and hire mercenaries to protect them. Believe it or not crafters and those who are peaceful should be punished for being foolish. If you're caught alone w/o protection you deserve to die in a PA world.

[ifireallymust]

I honestly believe if permadeath is to be included we need a watered down perma death and it apply equally to all those killed by players. I'll explain.

Lets say player A dies due to player B, well I think he should have the choice to be reincarnated which will knock down his current skills to half of what they are now (but not below 5 per skill) or wait for a tribe member(or nice guy) to revive him with magic. It keeps things strict and has consequences, but not to the point where you can't earn back what you've lost.

The reason why you should apply equally to all players is so that way crafters will take their defenses more seriously and hire mercenaries to protect them. Believe it or not crafters and those who are peaceful should be punished for being foolish. If you're caught alone w/o protection you deserve to die in a PA world.

Nope. This is just more ways for a zerg to bully smaller groups and solo players and force them to move where they are told to move and do what they are told to do. It can't be watered down, and no, it can't apply equally. It has to be only a consequence for PKers, in this case, only a certain type of PKer, otherwise, it's just more food for the disgusting, lame, and wussy zergs that are no challenge to create, no fun to play, and can not be combatted effectively.

[wolfmoonstrike]

Nope. This is just more ways for a zerg to bully smaller groups and solo players and force them to move where they are told to move and do what they are told to do. It can't be watered down, and no, it can't apply equally. It has to be only a consequence for PKers, in this case, only a certain type of PKer, otherwise, it's just more food for the disgusting, lame, and wussy zergs that are no challenge to create, no fun to play, and can not be combatted effectively.

So the foolish should be rewarded for their foolishness? If you're caught alone or solo it's your fault. If you were caught from behind its your fault. Risk should apply to everybody or you don't feel danger. I know Fire that you're huge soloer/ homesteader type but you also need to remember that this is a PA world and if you want to be protected you need either be more alert, be a hermit, or make loads of friends. The alone and the weak get crushed by the powerful in a barbaric world, its not fair and it sucks but its the path you wish to choose.

Btw I'm against zergs as well but if they are truly naked/weak/ inferior just massive in numbers then you can either run away with your massive and more experienced running skill or stand and fight and more likely win. I do not believe 10 newly ressurrected, naked characters should be able to take on a fully armored, experienced character and come close to winning.

Now if you got a lot of superior troops killing everybody they're not zergs.....

P.S. I got called you Fire because for the first few days of reading your name my mind split your name "I fire ally must" (didn't make much sense but I found it interesting) only recently did I put the spaces in the right place.

[ifireallymust]

So the foolish should be rewarded for their foolishness? If you're caught alone or solo it's your fault. If you were caught from behind its your fault. Risk should apply to everybody or you don't feel danger. I know Fire that you're huge soloer/ homesteader type but you also need to remember that this is a PA world and if you want to be protected you need either be more alert, be a hermit, or make loads of friends. The alone and the weak get crushed by the powerful in a barbaric world, its not fair and it sucks but its the path you wish to choose.

Btw I'm against zergs as well but if they are truly naked/weak/ inferior just massive in numbers then you can either run away with your massive and more experienced running skill or stand and fight and more likely win. I do not believe 10 newly ressurrected, naked characters should be able to take on a fully armored, experienced character and come close to winning.

Now if you got a lot of superior troops killing everybody they're not zergs.....

P.S. I got called you Fire because for the first few days of reading your name my mind split your name "I fire ally must" (didn't make much sense but I found it interesting) only recently did I put the spaces in the right place.

Whatever, don't care anymore. This change is all for the fraternity and soriety crowd who wouldn't know an original thought, much less the true meaning of the word 'freedom' if it bit them on the big toe. You guys got everything you wanted. So be it. I'll kill you every chance I get, every where I find you, every day. If a solo player can only be a PKer to survive, then I guess that's what I'll be.

But I have nothing but contempt for any of you, just so you know. Your play style is easy mode and pathetic. You risk nothing, not even in the game. It's all about numbers, and blame 'reality' for that, in a game. A large minority of this player base soloes, and the majority doesn't want to be in a tribe, they'll be homesteader groups, and now groups called clans. That majority is being forced to choose between quitting or killing to get what we need, since tribes will hog all the resources and push us around and bully us so that we get nothing.

Well, those of us with backbones will stay and make you pay for it. I aim to be one of them.

[pendergraft]

Battles need to be decisive. If you die in a battle, you should not be able to rejoin it. There's nothing worse than killing one player in a battle only to have him show up again a minute later. You've just been taken out of the fight; your character should be temporarily crippled, not heading off once more into the fray. This gives you incentive not to be completely reckless, but without being paralyzed by fear of losing your character.

[wolfmoonstrike]

Whatever, don't care anymore. This change is all for the fraternity and soriety crowd who wouldn't know an original thought, much less the true meaning of the word 'freedom' if it bit them on the big toe. You guys got everything you wanted. So be it. I'll kill you every chance I get, every where I find you, every day. If a solo player can only be a PKer to survive, then I guess that's what I'll be.

But I have nothing but contempt for any of you, just so you know. Your play style is easy mode and pathetic. You risk nothing, not even in the game. It's all about numbers, and blame 'reality' for that, in a game. A large minority of this player base soloes, and the majority doesn't want to be in a tribe, they'll be homesteader groups, and now groups called clans. That majority is being forced to choose between quitting or killing to get what we need, since tribes will hog all the resources and push us around and bully us so that we get nothing.

Well, those of us with backbones will stay and make you pay for it. I aim to be one of them.

Good I'm glad. Many heroes in comic books/legends and even reality (possibly tempered with a story being retold a lot lol) Started this way fighting for what they feel is right. If you honestly believe that I'm trying to take the easy way out, I'm not. I believe in paying for your actions and inactions. Fight the tribes and become a hero in name, others will join your cause. Just because you ally with someone doesn't mean you lose your independence and freedom.

Btw I love difficult games and would very much like to have permadeath or a harsh cost for death against a player but permadeath just isn't viable unless done from the beginning for an mmo. So I was offering a compromise so we could see some harsher penalties for death. I just believe foolishness should be punished just as much as actively fighting. My idea stemmed from demon souls (with alterations) if you get the chance play the game. Their are appropriate punishments for foolishness and being evil as well as proper rewards.

[pendergraft]

So the foolish should be rewarded for their foolishness? If you're caught alone or solo it's your fault. If you were caught from behind its your fault.

Yes, blame the victim. I suppose rape victims had it coming, eh? EH?

[wolfmoonstrike]

Yes, blame the victim. I suppose rape victims had it coming, eh? EH?

Whoa, whoa I'm talking in game. In the real world people aren't supposed to walk through life thinking they will get raped at any second. But this is a game of survival, yoru thoughts should be on surviving.

On a personal note if you rape someone you should be castrated.....just saying.

[pendergraft]

As a social experiment, I find Xsyon's player population rather ghastly. If what I'm hearing is true, the only reason most people here are (presumably) civil in reality is because they fear punishment. As there is no punishment in Xsyon, they free themselves from the burdensome constraints of morality and commence with the anal rapings.

[wolfmoonstrike]

As a social experiment, I find Xsyon's player population rather ghastly. If what I'm hearing is true, the only reason most people here are (presumably) civil in reality is because they fear punishment. As there is no punishment in Xsyon, they free themselves from the burdensome constraints of morality and commence with the anal rapings.

Welcome to the internet.

[pendergraft]

It'd seem, then, that if one wanted to make Xsyon especially challenging -- barring any type of permadeath system -- they should attempt to not be a loathsome human being.

[wolfmoonstrike]

It'd seem, then, that if one wanted to make Xsyon especially challenging -- barring any type of permadeath system -- they should attempt to not be a loathsome human being.

? not quite sure what you mean by this but if you have difficulty seperating game world and real word you may need to take a break from the computer....

[pendergraft]

Ah! But the conscience does not come with an on/off switch. We are inseparable from ourselves, or, as the great philosopher Buckaroo Banzai would have put it, wherever you go, there you are.

[wolfmoonstrike]

Ah! But the conscience does not come with an on/off switch. We are inseparable from ourselves, or, as the great philosopher Buckaroo Banzai would have put it, wherever you go, there you are.

Yes but humans have a way of detaching themselves from their dominant personality. Also humans have dual natures about them; even the best person can have some of the worst thoughts. If we weren't capable of playing a role more evil than ourselves their would not be actors. So while our actions in RL are different in a fictional world it does not mean those people are w/o morals.

[ifireallymust]

As a social experiment, I find Xsyon's player population rather ghastly. If what I'm hearing is true, the only reason most people here are (presumably) civil in reality is because they fear punishment. As there is no punishment in Xsyon, they free themselves from the burdensome constraints of morality and commence with the anal rapings.

Silly, silly dreamer. Did you think any human being on earth wasn't constrained more by fear of punishment than any moral compass? What do you think religion is for? Instilling fear in wrongdoers, and 'wrongdoer' is always and only defined by the dominant community.

We are beasts, the worst you can imagine cannot describe how awful we truly are as a species.

But I envy you and everyone else who thinks otherwise. I did, once. Knowing the truth is actually not a good thing. So carry on with your delusions of what our species really is, and I'll disturb your peace no more.

[wolfmoonstrike]

Silly, silly dreamer. Did you think any human being on earth wasn't constrained more by fear of punishment than any moral compass? What do you think religion is for? Instilling fear in wrongdoers, and 'wrongdoer' is always and only defined by the dominant community.

We are beasts, the worst you can imagine cannot describe how awful we truly are as a species.

But I envy you and everyone else who thinks otherwise. I did, once. Knowing the truth is actually not a good thing. So carry on with your delusions of what our species really is, and I'll disturb your peace no more.

an individual is intelligent the masses are idiots....I don't remember who said it first lol. I agree humans as a species can be quite disgusting but there are those out there that do have a moral compass not because of rules but because the feel that they know what is right.

[ifireallymust]

an individual is intelligent the masses are idiots....I don't remember who said it first lol. I agree humans as a species can be quite disgusting but there are those out there that do have a moral compass not because of rules but because the feel that they know what is right.

We can't be sure of that. The most readily violent and dangerous citizens are the youngest, that's why, in some ways, children make such good soldiers. Turn a child into a killer at the age of 8, and he or she has no moral compass, or not much of one, and can readily learn to delight in cruelty.

Because of this, we cannot really, as adults, separate 'natural' morality (which after all would have to be encoded in our DNA or simply not exist) from conditioned morality.

I resisted this for decades, and I doubt anyone is more unhappy about it than I am. But logic and reason indicate to me that this, however unpleasant, is the truth.

[wolfmoonstrike]

We can't be sure of that. The most readily violent and dangerous citizens are the youngest, that's why, in some ways, children make such good soldiers. Turn a child into a killer at the age of 8, and he or she has no moral compass, or not much of one, and can readily learn to delight in cruelty.

Because of this, we cannot really, as adults, separate 'natural' morality (which after all would have to be encoded in our DNA or simply not exist) from conditioned morality.

I resisted this for decades, and I doubt anyone is more unhappy about it than I am. But logic and reason indicate to me that this, however unpleasant, is the truth.

You bring up a nice point about the child soldiers. Though we can never truly understand the human mind, at least IMO. We are multifaceted, able to be so cruel and yet able to be so kind. Though we kind of derailed our topic here lol. Extreme consequences...was the original topic, yes?

[river111]

If my mind still is true to me, a while back on the features for this game there was a little blurb about how certain damage you took effected your life later on. If you broke your leg multiple times you might have a slightly lower walk/run speed. If you got your head beat on by a baseball bat repeatedly over several years you might just turn into a drooling idiot. (my example there).

This is what I would like to see as a side effect of PvP combat. If you are constantly out fighting, getting smacked with a shovel, cut with a dagger, hacked with an axe, eventually it will take its toll on you. Stats and abilities shoudl reflect what you have done with your life.

Someone who spends all thier time chopping trees and carrying logs is like a fitness trainee and his strength should go up. His movement speed shoudl probably go down as he ages though since carrying 20 foot logs on your back every day just isn't good for your knees.

This should also apply to the PvPers. If the combat system does in fact determine damage by location hit, and armor worn on that location, then there should also be a record of how many times you got hit in a part of the body over time. If you get hit in the left arm 200 times over 2 years while you have been fighting, then your left arm should get a penalty on your combat when using it. If it shows you got hit in the head 200 times in that same 2 years then you should have lost a few points of intelligence, maybe your draw distance gets reduced as well from eye site problems.

Sure, you may become stronger, more dextrous, more combat affluent, but you did get stabbed 638 times already too, and that has to count for something.

[ifireallymust]

If my mind still is true to me, a while back on the features for this game there was a little blurb about how certain damage you took effected your life later on. If you broke your leg multiple times you might have a slightly lower walk/run speed. If you got your head beat on by a baseball bat repeatedly over several years you might just turn into a drooling idiot. (my example there).

This is what I would like to see as a side effect of PvP combat. If you are constantly out fighting, getting smacked with a shovel, cut with a dagger, hacked with an axe, eventually it will take its toll on you. Stats and abilities shoudl reflect what you have done with your life.

Someone who spends all thier time chopping trees and carrying logs is like a fitness trainee and his strength should go up. His movement speed shoudl probably go down as he ages though since carrying 20 foot logs on your back every day just isn't good for your knees.

This should also apply to the PvPers. If the combat system does in fact determine damage by location hit, and armor worn on that location, then there should also be a record of how many times you got hit in a part of the body over time. If you get hit in the left arm 200 times over 2 years while you have been fighting, then your left arm should get a penalty on your combat when using it. If it shows you got hit in the head 200 times in that same 2 years then you should have lost a few points of intelligence, maybe your draw distance gets reduced as well from eye site problems.

Sure, you may become stronger, more dextrous, more combat affluent, but you did get stabbed 638 times already too, and that has to count for something.

Logging is pretty dangerous work. If you do something dangerous while tired, hungry, or thirsty, I think there should be a chance of an accident, with permanent injury as a consequence as well. Maybe that is a good compromise with the pvper's view. Since I did derail things a bit, I'll try to put it back on track.

But humans are still evil.

[pendergraft]

Yes but humans have a way of detaching themselves from their dominant personality. Also humans have dual natures about them; even the best person can have some of the worst thoughts. If we weren't capable of playing a role more evil than ourselves their would not be actors. So while our actions in RL are different in a fictional world it does not mean those people are w/o morals.

An actor goes by a script. A video game roleplayer, on the other hand, is guided by something a little more innate. If a player who covets the belongings of another player acts upon his desire, it comes at the expense of the other person. An actor in the same position is not stealing; there is nothing to steal. It does not come at the expense of the other actor because her belongings are props made by the art department -- which is where they are returned at the end of the shoot.

In Xsyon, player effort equals productivity. To take what they produce is summarily immoral and should induce within a morally upright individual disgust, no matter the medium.

In regards to the duality of man, you are correct. A volunteer firefighter comes home at night and masturbates to images of abused puppies, or logs into Xsyon and rampages across the countryside leaving a slew of dead innocents in his bloody wake. It doesn't make his actions any less immoral.

[Lerxst]

This question is mainly for the PvP / conquest crowd:

Would you still enjoy unrestricted PvP if it had extreme consequences for all players, like perma death and settlements getting completely burned to the ground? Or do you think this gets in the way of having "fun" by simply running around and fighting each other?

The basic concept is simple: Realism. There are barely any restrictions at all, but the game mechanics make sure that war and violence are just as devastating as in RL. If you go to war, you'll probably get killed sooner or later, and that was that. Two tribes escalating war might completely wipe each other off the map. Naturally, you should really really know what you're doing when starting a fight, or your PvP-fun will be kinda short-lived. This is also how the amount of wars and crime is balanced: It's very risky and only pays off in certain situations. Well, you get the idea.


A little background:
I made this poll a while ago, suggesting a similar system of extreme consequences used by Haven & Hearth and Salem. Apparently, most players didn't like it much, but few posted their reasons. Also, all the confusion about Xyson's PvP rendered the poll kinda invalid anyway...
http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthread.php/4048-FFA-PvP-should-be-like-quot-Salem-quot

Read my past post on "Necessary evils". The Internet is full of ass-hats who will abuse any system they're given. How would you feel if your 8 month old character got "noob ganked" by 5 naked guys running around wearing nothing but their fists. Time they invest - 10 minutes vs time you invest - 8 months.

[river111]

Logging is pretty dangerous work. If you do something dangerous while tired, hungry, or thirsty, I think there should be a chance of an accident, with permanent injury as a consequence as well. Maybe that is a good compromise with the pvper's view. Since I did derail things a bit, I'll try to put it back on track.

But humans are still evil.

I agree, and my point was the penalty should be realistic and equal no matter the characters chosen path, but it should accurately reflect that path that was chosen. Keep in mind, a PvPer would most likely have the same long term effects as a PvE hunter, the prey may be different but being smacked around is still being smacked around. If it comes from an aluminum basball bat of the paw of a 400lb grizzly it doesn't matter does it?

And yeah, I could see a risk factor in crafting as well depending on how well you maintain your food/drink/energy levels while your crafting. That guy who spends hour after hour terraforming with just an occasional sleep and no water should be at risk while he is digging holes. THis also should apply to everyone though equally. If you let your health go under then you should get sick or injured from it.

The important thing though is that cause and effect should be in game. It really is enough of a detriment to the PvPer if you consider what they chose to do every day. A PvPer who is out getting into 30-40 fights a day, against weapons of all sorts, dieing over and over from mortal wounds, will see eneough detriment over thier life to warrant the risk people want for it. I dont care how you try and smooth it over, in the end, when a pit fighter is old, they are all bent over and half crippled from what they have dome to thier bodies over the years. There should be no reason that can't be happening here as well.

And those who think this is just for PvPers its not. Your targets are not always other like minded PvPers, those PvEers who get ganked occasionally will see the same effects as they age dependant on how many times they get killed or fight back. So its an equal opportunity penalty to everyone.


Read my past post on "Necessary evils". The Internet is full of ass-hats who will abuse any system they're given. How would you feel if your 8 month old character got "noob ganked" by 5 naked guys running around wearing nothing but their fists. Time they invest - 10 minutes vs time you invest - 8 months.

Oh and on this, yes but this is already something Jordi is looking into. Giving those 10 minute reroll naked gankers a serious disadvantage in combat against people who have the 8 months in. If those 5 still can't kill the one you what diffeence does it make if they are there or not.

Hopefully he gets this in and working soon, honestly think it needs to be. Wont help a lot of people for the first month, but as time goes on it will significantly deter this behavior.

[wolfmoonstrike]

Read my past post on "Necessary evils". The Internet is full of ass-hats who will abuse any system they're given. How would you feel if your 8 month old character got "noob ganked" by 5 naked guys running around wearing nothing but their fists. Time they invest - 10 minutes vs time you invest - 8 months.

Sad but true. Their just needs to be a consequence that is big enough to deter such things but not so harsh that people quit. I still think a serious semi-perma skill loss upon death would be the best idea. Like when you die you lose 25% of your total skill. This would also mean that having better skills/gear would allow you to kill 10 of those little naked bastards. It would also mean the crafters would have to hire mercs and come out clothed if they wanted to protect their skills.

[wolfmoonstrike]

I agree, and my point was the penalty should be realistic and equal no matter the characters chosen path, but it should accurately reflect that path that was chosen. Keep in mind, a PvPer would most likely have the same long term effects as a PvE hunter, the prey may be different but being smacked around is still being smacked around. If it comes from an aluminum basball bat of the paw of a 400lb grizzly it doesn't matter does it?

And yeah, I could see a risk factor in crafting as well depending on how well you maintain your food/drink/energy levels while your crafting. That guy who spends hour after hour terraforming with just an occasional sleep and no water should be at risk while he is digging holes. THis also should apply to everyone though equally. If you let your health go under then you should get sick or injured from it.

The important thing though is that cause and effect should be in game. It really is enough of a detriment to the PvPer if you consider what they chose to do every day. A PvPer who is out getting into 30-40 fights a day, against weapons of all sorts, dieing over and over from mortal wounds, will see eneough detriment over thier life to warrant the risk people want for it. I dont care how you try and smooth it over, in the end, when a pit fighter is old, they are all bent over and half crippled from what they have dome to thier bodies over the years. There should be no reason that can't be happening here as well.

And those who think this is just for PvPers its not. Your targets are not always other like minded PvPers, those PvEers who get ganked occasionally will see the same effects as they age dependant on how many times they get killed or fight back. So its an equal opportunity penalty to everyone.

I like this but I also believe their should be a small reincarnation/descendant thing for when you live long enough so you can recreate your character with some of your skills. Kinda like you remembered from a past life or you were trained by your father/mother. I mean there is a certain point that if you're that crippled it would be best to just start over but I don't believe that a person should lose years of their hardwork (which it would be by the time you're that old) completely. So at that point push maybe the reincarnation button or have a kid with the opposite gender, so you can save your name if you want and maybe carry over some kind of bonus.