Great post about PvP and PvE type players in MMO's

[Niburu]

Hello,

The OP, and many who have posted in support of him, are absolutely correct here. The bottom line is simple: if there is no risk versus reward metric for PvP, with both individual and broad scale implications, then PvP is just an e-sport.

One note before I go any further: there's nothing wrong with e-sport. It's just that if I want that, I'll play a shooter or RTS. This, I think answers the question PvP players always get from the hardcore PvE community of, "if you want to PvP, why don't you just play a shooter?" The answer that I want my actions to have consequences. I want my destruction of you to mean something, and I am willing to risk that my loss will mean something as well.

This is something that I have come to believe that many PvE players either cannot or will not understand. The hardcore PvE player defines his goals around the repetition of an action, the raid, which carries little risk and perhaps some reward, but has no broader impact in the game. For whatever reason, this is what they want, and they will not accept that other people enjoy different aspects of a game.

Because developers want to maximize subscriptions, they will attempt to cater to both playstyles. Because so many hardcore PvE players are so risk averse, and because they make up a large faction of the MMO community, they have a strong impact on developers' ideas. And so, developers attempt to cater to both by separating the predators from the prey. There are grazing areas, and there are violent colluseums, but the world is segregated. This is the WoW model, and it is not reflective of what we would call a virtual world. Rather, it is a collection of different games on a single server.

Developers can make the arena as "fun" as they want, but they will ultimately fail to deliver what the PvP community wants so long as they cannot influence the greater savannah. Further, because a segregated world is so unnatural, developers who choose this path cannot make a virtual world. The beauty of a virtual world is that it creates all sorts of interesting emergent play, like virtual economies, which are actually beneficial to the non-PvP player.

If the hardcore PvE player would have a bit longer vision, he would see that, if he would give up just a bit of safety, the returns, in the form of emergent gameplay, vastly outweigh the loss of absolute security. This is something that PvP players understand because they are familiar with risk versus reward metrics. The PvE player, being less familiar with those metrics, and having been catered to by games like WoW, are understandably less equipped to see this natural outcome.

Now, the difference between the real world savannah and the virtual one is that, in the latter, the gazelle's have the option of not playing. So, the trick is to set a balance point where gazelles have lots of grass to graze on in safety, but the best, or certain unique grass, requires venturing into the savannah to obtain. The penalties must also be balanced; they must sting, but not so much that the risk versus reward metric causes gazelles to never venture into the savannah, or worse, that they simply choose another game. This is the integrated approach that games like Eve do so well.

Many will argue against this position, but it is because they are gazelles. They want all the grass in their safe pastures and to leave the lions and hyenas to just fight, but without the reward of any tender meat. Of course I do not blame the gazelle; it is human nature to argue in your own self-interest. However, if we continue down this road, then MMOs will continue to be just games and not truly virtual worlds.

Please read and share your opinion....

[Jadzia]

Interesting post. It's clearly written by a PvP player, and the only problem is that he doesn't understand the thinking and the motivation of a hardcore PvE player. When I say hardcore I mean someone like me, who hates every form of forced PvP. No problem with optional PvP at all ( be it flagged or separated zones).

His main argument is that the 'gazelles' should accept the role of being gazelles and should pay for a game they don't really enjoy...and in return they get a truly virtual world. But this 'truly virtual world' is a world a PvP player wants, not a PvE one. I do love huge, open virtual worlds with living economy...but that doesn't require open world FFA PvP. In my virtual world there is no forced PvP. As long as FFA PvP is there it's not really enjoyable for me.

And its not because of the fear of a loss or something like that. It has nothing to do with it. That's why the risk and reward argument never convinces a hardcore PvE player. Risk is not what we want to avoid, thus reward for it won't do anything. What I want to avoid for any cost in a game I pay for and I play in my free time for enjoyment is meeting assholes and abusive players. And unfortunately, FFA open PvP games seem to attract this type. As long as the game's mechanic allows players to grief others they will. I know there are ways to grief others in every game...but there are way much more possibilities in an FFA PvP game. I can grief others even in ATITD, which has no combat at all, still you will hardly find any griefer there.

So these are my thoughts :) It's not realistic to ask a player to pay and play a game he/she doesn't enjoy just to make other (PvP) players happy. There is nothing there in return for the PvE player.

I'm no doubt a player who really hates forced PvP. I'm sure there are other people who consider themselves as PvE players, but at the same time enjoys the thrill of an open PvP environment. These PvE players are the ones who could make good 'gazelles', but seems there are not enough of them.

[Kegan]

I must agree with Jadzia on this one i am also a PvE player. Like with this game i like the hunting, building and crafting not the PvP part of it. If they were to allow tribal areas to be PvP then i would have to rethink my subscriptions to the game

[MrDDT]

I do agree with them that PVP shouldnt be forced on players. It should be risk vs reward. Having safe areas is a good thing for a game. But also having an area that is of higher PVP risk and PVPers rewarded for risking their efforts would help all 3 types be happy.
Non PVPers will be happy for safety areas able to do what they like there, with basic rewards (much like we have now).
Middle of the road PVPers who like it when they want it, and want safety at other times can go to these risky areas and get some rewards for it. (Sorta like going near the mist for mutants)
PVPers risking what they have will have something to fight for and protect, being rewarded for the risk of loss. (Sorta like living near the mist with all the mutants)





P.S.

Why are you even playing this game if you dont find it fun? This game has always said it would be FFA PVP. Its never hid that.


As long as FFA PvP is there it's not really enjoyable for me.

[aliksteel]

Very good post, But this is the one point I agree with the most.

the trick is to set a balance point where gazelles have lots of grass to graze on in safety, but the best, or certain unique grass, requires venturing into the savannah to obtain. The penalties must also be balanced; they must sting, but not so much that the risk versus reward metric causes gazelles to never venture into the savannah, or worse, that they simply choose another game.
I'm more PvE, But I like the idea that the best things in the game would be out in the open(so to speak) for all to fight for. To me it's the same idea that a builder would want, If you can build anything without work or risk, You will never feel as if you did anything. and When it comes to finding rare mat/items or new tech it should not go without risk. But then I like the thought of having a good mix of PvP and PvE gamers all working together in one tribe.

[Jadzia]

P.S.

Why are you even playing this game if you dont find it fun? This game has always said it would be FFA PVP. Its never hid that.
Because I've only been attacked once during all this time (in last March, lol), and I was able to run away easily then. The game does have PvP in theory, but thankfully (from my point of view of course) it doesn't work right now. And that's why that type of player I'd like to avoid has left the game. They were here a year ago, but when they saw that their griefing opportunity is very limited, they left. Still, if there wasn't even the possibility to be attacked when I don't want it, I would like the game much much more.

I love games with separated open PvP-safe zones, since going to the PvP zone is always optional. Just not the whole open world PvP stuff.

RuneScape does it well imo. Or did it well when I was playing. It has a separated full loot PvP zone (the wilderness) with very high risk and reward. But the reward is available in other ways for the players who don't like to go there. Like a hat that can only be obtained in the PvP zone ( very expensive stuff in game), that I can buy from a PvPer. I can go there myself if I want to, but I'm not forced to. And I can earn a huge amount of money with peaceful activities without ever going to the wilderness, so I can buy the wildy zone stuffs easily. PvPer earn money in the way he likes, going to the wildy and risking, while I can earn the same amount of money while doing what I like. There is nothing in RS which is necessary for everyday life that could only be obtained in the wildy.

[Niburu]

Very good post, But this is the one point I agree with the most.

I'm more PvE, But I like the idea that the best things in the game would be out in the open(so to speak) for all to fight for. To me it's the same idea that a builder would want, If you can build anything without work or risk, You will never feel as if you did anything. and When it comes to finding rare mat/items or new tech it should not go without risk. But then I like the thought of having a good mix of PvP and PvE gamers all working together in one tribe.

I'am glad you quote that part because i think that is the most important point he made in the whole post. The thing is in a game were you got one char in a local enviroment were you have to focus on crafting or combat the PvE player needs the demand of PVP players and the PVP player need the item from PvE players to get an egde over his enemies.

Darkfall doesn't have this ( skill everything, best PVPers are usually good crafters)
Mortal Online doesn't have this ( 3 characters per account one crafter one PVP char and one evil char....)

[Willowhawk]

Interesting post. It's clearly written by a PvP player, and the only problem is that he doesn't understand the thinking and the motivation of a hardcore PvE player.

While I prefer the added challenge of PVP I agree with Jadzia that although this guys post was an attempt at sounding impartial he is clearly of a set mind and partial to PVP. And although I also agree with the risk vs reward argument, I am not a fan of losing my tribe or tribe territory.

I agree with DDT "also having an area that is of higher PVP risk and PVPers rewarded for risking their efforts would help all 3 types be happy." I would love to see the game add some high risk high reward areas. My question is how would they do this and not have everyone throw totems up there, or would that be part of the risk? The problem with this I see is you would end up with one or a few strong tribes dominating the "High reward" areas and no one else would be able to get in.

[joexxxz]

Jadzia your way of thinking is kind of reminding me of WOW.

[Jadzia]

Jadzia your way of thinking is kind of reminding me of WOW.

I don't know WOW, I've never played that.

[schlock]

I'm kind of surprised by the responses in this thread.

This is the apocalypse and it seems a number of players want their new world to be safe from other players. I think this is the same kind of thinking that brought us to this end in the first place. I want to exercise lawlessness in my new make believe world. If I want safety and boundaries, I'll stop playing and go outside to the real world.

Playing with virtual dolls and building extravagant doll houses all day long is fun, but only for a while. At some point I want to kill the other dolls, take their stuff and burn their houses down. Hell, I'm building mine with the idea of defense, that's part of the fun. Mind you, it shouldn't be easy. Balance can be had.

I'm subbed to this game with the firm understanding that it will simulate reality to the best of it's ability, including murder.

I really liked the OP's quote, but obviously I'm pvp oriented. But I also enjoy the pve and crafting. Alas, my perfect game...almost.

[znaiika]

Why are you even playing this game if you dont find it fun? This game has always said it would be FFA PVP. Its never hid that.

I agree on PVP but not a full PVP.
Optional PVP is always a better game and attracts most of it's customers who would enjoy any type of play styles.
Currently it is kind of optional mixed with forced and I think it is still possible to play for all type of players there are places where totems are far from each other but those are still in the wild, one could just log out if he think that hi is in danger and want be able to stand ground.
They should keep it this way.

[MrDDT]

I agree on PVP but not a full PVP.
Optional PVP is always a better game and attracts most of it's customers who would enjoy any type of play styles.
Currently it is kind of optional mixed wi
that hi is in danger and want be able to stand ground.
They should keep it this way.


Why is optional better? Also you state it as a fact, when really its an opinion.

Currently it is optional mixed with potential forced. Right now no one even fights. There is no point to it. So you are upset about something that doesn't even happen.

[znaiika]

Why is optional better? Also you state it as a fact, when really its an opinion.

Currently it is optional mixed with potential forced. Right now no one even fights. There is no point to it. So you are upset about something that doesn't even happen.

Because I see how game is developing based on what is happening to rules.

[MrDDT]

Because I see how game is developing based on what is happening to rules.

Which is how? Also that doesnt explain the problem.

[znaiika]

Which is how? Also that doesnt explain the problem.

Game is slowly transforms in to full PVP, or I may said it to softly, kind of picked up pace lately.

[MrDDT]

Game is slowly transforms in to full PVP, or I may said it to softly, kind of picked up pace lately.

Its always been said it was FFA PVP. So what do you mean?

Right off the features page.



The world is open to free combat with the exception of tribe zones.
Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons.

[znaiika]

Its always been said it was FFA PVP. So what do you mean?


People are confused by FFA PVP, that should say optional or forced instead.

And this is what keeps many people off this game. if it was optional? the other side which loves PVE, and for PVP as an option, not forced, would actually join.
I bought this game because I wanted to see the features, and I can tell, this is a great game and would attract many players, if PVP was an optional.

FFA PVP = optional PVP.
Forced PVP is not optional.
FFA lets people to PVP any time by choosing an option of flagging.
Forced PVP dose not give you a choice really, just may give you some limitations like safe area, that is what we have now, that is what drove so many people away.
Don't be confused by FFA PVP, FFA PVP could have many different forms of rule sets, and one of those forms are options by flagging.
If I understand what FFA means correctly? this is the meaning "Free For All" and dose not say forced, that means that you can flag for PVP any time and you don't have the limits of how long you can stay flagged or what rules of looting you could choose, that is FFA PVP.

[simple69]

I think you don't know the meaning of 'FFA'. Which means FREE FOR ALL, there is no O which is optional in there. FFA PVP does not mean optional PVP. Seriously...


However, I do want to post to this as we are all of different mind and have different play styles. I do like the risks of PvP, I like playing games were I could be cutting down trees and the next minute looking up at someone looting my corpse for not watching over my shoulder. I think alot of people put to much value in items in the game and are to afraid of losing things. If I don't want to lose something I don't carry it around. In the 3 or so months that I have been playing I have never been attacked openly and I haven't really seen to many other players when i travel to other zones. I do agree with both sides on this argument though. I do like the idea of contested zones or areas on map with high risk high reward. Maybe buildings or sacrade areas that can be controlled by a tribe that will give rewards like +10 to scavanging or +10 to all stats while they hold it. If another tribe takes it they get the reward for set time.. maybe it can be on timers or whatever. Something for us PvPers to do.

Also I remember reading another idea someone had. A flag that is set at character creation that cannot be changed. You set it to either PvP or non-PvP.

[znaiika]

I think you don't know the meaning of 'FFA'.
1: Which means FREE FOR ALL, there is no O which is optional in there. FFA PVP does not mean optional PVP. Seriously...
2: Also I remember reading another idea someone had. A flag that is set at character creation that cannot be changed. You set it to either PvP or non-PvP.

1: Free means available to all not forced, available could have many forms.
2: What happen if someone choose PVE at creation? and decide to PVP? can he make another character for PVP as well? that system is not good by design.
And by the way what would PVPers say when they can't attack those people on the same server.
That is why there should be two servers one for PVE with optional PVP, and one for hardcore PVP.
That should keep both players happy.
If you really like the danger? your own hardcore PVP server is a good thing not a bad one.
And would keep PVEers in their own PVE with optional PVP server.

[banden]

"forced" and "optional" are really useless concepts to be pinning on FFA PVP. Like simple69 says it cant be optional if its free-for-all and it also cant be forced because you consented to free for all PVP when you bought the game. If you dont think you did that then you clearly made a mistake and dont belong here but trying to convince people that the game needs to change to fit your playstyle... like Ihve stated to you before and others have stated, that is bullshit.

There is not going to be a PVE server because you split one low server population into 2 tiny ones and the rules will only change with alignements, I noticed that through all these retarded discussions you havent once asked what alignements will mean for PVE and PVP, maybe you should learn more about what the devs have planned instead of being on the fence about changing stuff that has allready been impliemented or planned to be impliemented. Think you can manage that? no? Then get the hell out.

[znaiika]

"forced" and "optional" are really useless concepts to be pinning on FFA PVP. Like simple69 says it cant be optional if its free-for-all and it also cant be forced because you consented to free for all PVP when you bought the game. If you dont think you did that then you clearly made a mistake and dont belong here but trying to convince people that the game needs to change to fit your playstyle... like Ihve stated to you before and others have stated, that is bullshit.

There is not going to be a PVE server because you split one low server population into 2 tiny ones and the rules will only change with alignements, I noticed that through all these retarded discussions you havent once asked what alignements will mean for PVE and PVP, maybe you should learn more about what the devs have planned instead of being on the fence about changing stuff that has allready been impliemented or planned to be impliemented. Think you can manage that? no? Then get the hell out.

First of all!!! it became tiny with the change of limited safe ares, the server was populated heavily, and could of been at that level, if Xsyon kept their word of having two servers.
Secondly!!! I am not trying to convince anyone to change Xsyon I am trying to convince to just add PVE server with optional PVP, that is all.
After Xsyon do that? the population will grow back as it was if not more, as people will return to their homestead, because this game is awesome.

[Azurfale]

Optional PVP... lol

All the Gazelles would leave that option off for sure. I am in total agreement with the OP, the only problem I see is that Xsyon doesn't have any 'rare' resources. Unless your going to go chop down all their trees and force them to leave tribe to get materials.

[banden]

znaiika, argueing with you is pointless, you have no freakin idea why all those people left. I dont care who you spoke to, unless you did a survey of 1000 people who left Xsyon and the majority stated the express reason, that it was FFA PVP, you dont know a thing. Add to the fact that it was allways advertised that it was going to be FFA PVP, if anyone left it was the PVPers who didnt like the safe zones, those were added in the beta. It would be pretty fucking stupid to buy a game that was advertised to be FFA PVP, if you dont like that. Dont you think?

Seriously, stop posting. If you cant deal with the fact that Xsyon is FFA PVP then dont play the game. It is that simple.

[znaiika]

znaiika, argueing with you is pointless, you have no freakin idea why all those people left. I dont care who you spoke to, unless you did a survey of 1000 people who left Xsyon and the majority stated the express reason, that it was FFA PVP, you dont know a thing. Add to the fact that it was allways advertised that it was going to be FFA PVP, if anyone left it was the PVPers who didnt like the safe zones, those were added in the beta. It would be pretty fucking stupid to buy a game that was advertised to be FFA PVP, if you dont like that. Dont you think?

Seriously, stop posting. If you cant deal with the fact that Xsyon is FFA PVP then dont play the game. It is that simple.

Are you willing to sacrifice over 80% of people who would play Xsyion? just to keep one server? because that is how many left Xsyon, and they left Xsyon mainly for forced PVP I hope you realize of what you're saying.
And I don't understand why you afraid of having two servers?
If you care to explain.

And I got it FFA = forced for all it's not free for all, based on your statements.

[simple69]

I agree Banden he keeps trying to change the meaning of the word Free-For-All to suit his argument (which honestly he has not made a solid one yet). At this point in time there is no reason for 2 servers, the population of the game is so small that splitting it would only destroy this game completely. Right now the way the game is, it is MORE PvE friendly then anything else. With the state of the game we don't need more PvE content we need more PvP content. I don't get why all the PvE'rs are complaining so much. Its the PvP'rs that should be complaining and trying to create arguments to add more PvP friendly content.

[Willowhawk]

Znaiika, you have been aurguing this for days now and I am sorry but I don't think you have played Xsyon enough to understand what you are asking. This is a small sandbox company and the cost alone to maintain another server let alone the low population AND the fact that it is still in a development stage all clearly make another server a very bad decision. Who knows, maybe someday when the game is more polished and there are lots of people they will add servers, and perhaps some PVE only servers. As for the PVP? Almost everyone in game spends the majority of their time in their safe zone crafting and building. That is what this game is in it's current state. So yes you CAN and DO have PVE only areas but there is really no typical PVE in the game currently (quests, raids, dungeon) so what else can people do? PVP if they choose to. So your whole argument is really pointless in every regard. You have made half as many posts in a couple weeks as I have in a couple years. Have you heard the saying "There's no use beating a dead horse" Give it up man, you lost this whole argument days ago! We don't need another "I'm always right no matter what anyone else says" poster here.

[znaiika]

I agree Banden he keeps trying to change the meaning of the word Free-For-All to suit his argument (which honestly he has not made a solid one yet). At this point in time there is no reason for 2 servers, the population of the game is so small that splitting it would only destroy this game completely. Right now the way the game is, it is MORE PvE friendly then anything else. With the state of the game we don't need more PvE content we need more PvP content. I don't get why all the PvE'rs are complaining so much. Its the PvP'rs that should be complaining and trying to create arguments to add more PvP friendly content.

Yehh, so attacking other players outside of tribe, full loot and now even containers are going to be looted outside of tribes, which was in fact stated on features that containers that are in use are supposed to be inaccessible for loot, are all PVE content?
That is why so many people are escaping buying Xsyon not to invest in something that they don't have freedom of choice in.
I don't know if Xsyon is willing to loose those players.

@ Willowhawk.
If xsyon make this server as PVE with optional PVP? Xsyon will have much higher population that means more income, more options to develop faster.
So many are willing to come back and there are many who left this game due to PVP drama mainly, they all understand the development of this game, and that this game is not done yet, that wasn't a cause for mass exit, the PVP drama is.

[Azurfale]

I've come to a conclusion.

A PvP player gets killed, he respawns regears and heads out again.

A PvE player gets killed, he respawns logs onto forums and bitches how the game shouldn't be FFA.

Willowhawk is correct. PvP players do not complain enough.

[Cyrianna]

A second server was never "promised" it was only stated that this would be looked into as an option. After Jordi spoke to the community it was decided that this was not a feasible option. The server population was far too low to even consider it.

As for people leaving the game over the last year, our tribe itself had 20+ member leave the game, all for the same reason, there was not enough content to keep us active. Once you achieved 100 in your skill, or multiple skills, what was the point of continuing? There was little to no conflict, and no reason to trade as a small tribe can acquire everything, along with promised features that were never implemented within a reasonable amount of time. IE tree regrowth (thank god this one at least is active now, and yet people still bitch and whine about trees, go figure), Cooking, animal taming, quality of goods that actually matter, improved animal AI ( most animals still act like epileptic helmet wearing window lickers), and many more. We keep in contact with most of our tribe that packed up and left, who have stated that they will return, once there is a reason and a purpose to do so.

Fact is, with any game, it WILL die if there is no reason for conflict, so your reasoning for wanting a PVE only server is bullshit, it will last a month, maybe two, before there is just no one around. PVP content fuels the economy, because PVP'ers dont want to craft, they just want to buy your crafted goods, which gives crafters a reason and a purpose to continue their crafting, which gives PVP'ers a reason and a purpose to do what they enjoy. Why should it matter if that creature thats hunting you down is another player character, or a big ass bear? Its a never ending cycle that is necessary to keep a game of this genre afloat. Take for example ATITD, purely crafting game, no conflict. They have to completely reset their game every 5-6 months with a "new" version so that the players have something to do. I use the term NEW lightly as its just the same old crap, they just basically wipe the world every time. Is that what you want? A Xsyon that is wiped every 6 months... how many people you think are going to stick around when they have to completely rebuild months worth of work, only to know that just around the corner they'll have to do it again.

Sounds to me like youre really only complaining, not about the PVP factor, but that all your stuff all over the world cannot be protected at all times. Its pretty simple, keep your shit locked up in your house, not laying on the neighbors lawn and it'll be protected. If its rare or valuable, your chances of getting it home safely are pretty damn high, as the game world is very large, and the chance that you might actually run into another person out there that will be a threat is very very low. Even during launch, at high peak, with thousands of people online, i could run around the world and maybe see a handful of other players, 90% of which are carebear crafters just like you, that have no intention of engaging in PVP content, and you know what, we all got along just fine.

So get off your whiney little soapbox, no ones going to change the game just because you have nothing better to do with your time than complain on the forums all day. Either get back in game, and craft your silly stuff, or STFU and go somewhere else. I hear ATITD and Minecraft are looking for new players....

Move along people, nothing to see here, nothing to see here...

[znaiika]

@ Cyrianna.
I am not afraid of constant risk, but many people are, and Xsyon loose those that could help with an economy to keep this game alive.
And as it is stated containers which are in use should stay protected.

[MrDDT]

@ Cyrianna.
I am not afraid of constant risk, but many people are, and Xsyon loose those that could help with an economy to keep this game alive.
And as it is stated containers which are in use should stay protected.

Who cares about the "many people", this isnt about every person being happy to play Xsyon. Its about what the dev wants. Its been kicked over a year ago this dead horse has been talked about and answered.

This isnt the game for you if you dont like the ruleset Im sorry, Xsyon already made the choice. Guess what he picked? He picked LESS PVP. Right now we are playing on the Xsyon version of what he called "PVE", his version of the "PVP" or what he called "War server" is the same server we have now, only safe zones would be gone. That's it. The PVE choice you are talking about was NEVER an option.

We understand what you want, we understand you think it will bring billions of players from Wurm to play in Xsyon. But its NOT AN OPTION. Just like its not an option to have 3d tunneling in the game. Its just not. You have to stay "Do I want to play this or not" some choices are not in your hands, and the # of people that might play isnt going to matter.

The game was made with Xsyon's vision in mind, think of that before you go off about how many people will be playing. Using his vision, now think of what the game should have or need.
ATTID style Xsyon, isnt on the table. Never was.

[simple69]

Yehh, so attacking other players outside of tribe, full loot and now even containers are going to be looted outside of tribes, which was in fact stated on features that containers that are in use are supposed to be inaccessible for loot, are all PVE content?
That is why so many people are escaping buying Xsyon not to invest in something that they don't have freedom of choice in.
I don't know if Xsyon is willing to loose those players.

You keep going back to this bin argument and saying its a PvP change.. Were is the PvP in looting a basket someone left laying out in the middle of nowhere?!?!?!? Then you say everyone isn't buying the game because of this Basket change?? How is looting a basket left behind by a inactive player or a tribe that has gone inactive affecting people buying the game?? Seriously.....

[Cyrianna]

lol, i cant even remember where i left my car keys on the kitchen counter half the time, let alone try and remember where i left some damn basket in xsyon... if you find it, i hope i left something good in there for you!

[Book]

Why all the angst? For folks so certain to be the authority on what the devs want, you sure seem threatened by a contrary opinion!

Telling someone to just stop posting because they have a different point of view doesn't seem all that cool. I'm surprised none of the guides have seen fit to cool things down a bit.

There's been an ongoing difference amongst some members of the community. For some, the FFA PVP aspect is the meat and potatoes. Right on.

For me, and presumably not just me, the FFA PVP was just something that may add something, possibly, but it had nothing to do with why I bought the game.

Yes, it was very exciting when I first got in having heard stories of people getting stripped naked by bands of marauders. No, it's not the getting stripped part that was exciting, mind out of gutter people, it was the added element of survival. Notice, I said Added element. Just one of many, or so I thought.

I was way more excited by the other kind of survival out there. Man vs. Nature. I loved the complexity and depth of the crafting. I wasn't against being killed, part of the territory, but just to bring the point home, a very small part.

I soon discovered what one quitting player referred to as "giggling pimple-faced kids" running around griefing people. They were naked, with pre-order weapons, camping outside friends' lands making it impossible for them to play. I know I know, get protection, whatever, it's not fun.

Once, we did manage to fight back a little by gathering as many people as possible. The result? Kids came back and deforested the entire region while we slept. Not a problem anymore, but lots of friends were out the door right then and there. Not fun.

People quit for all kinds of reasons. Sure, some because they really didn't like the combat mechanics. Others, because safe zones meant they couldn't take away someone else's fun entirely 24/7. Others, simply lag, or not quite the feature list they wanted, or perhaps intestinal parasites, who knows. If you're willing to hang your hat on one reason, then the only thing that really matters is that you've developed tunnel vision and should seek immediate medical attention.

PvPers don't like to craft some say, which is why PvE players are needed, but the PvPer should get special cookies. While I understand risk vs. reward, as much risk can be implemented in a PvE setting to warrant the reward. It just wreaks to me of a certain sub-segment of the PvP community feeling overly entitled and special. Not the kinds of folks I'd want to deal with until they mature a little, and in this environment when population grows, it becomes difficult to simply avoid/ignore them since they stopped reading at FFA PVP and come in with only one thing in mind.

See what I did there? I don't entirely agree with some of you. Oh noes! Feel free to berate belittle and insult me right off the forums. By all means.

[simple69]

If you have read through all his posts, and this isn't the first time he has brought this up you would understand why someone might not want him to continue to posting. :) I don't care if he posts at all.. My biggest beef is he is crying about PvP were PvP isn't the issue. He is upset about the upcoming basket changes and saying that the Devs are favoring the PvP'rs but what does looting a basket out in the open have to do with PvP? Nothing......

Exactly, you get how frustrating that is? I could pick apart your post but I assume it was written this way to entice a fight so I am not going to bite. :)

[znaiika]

If you have read through all his posts, and this isn't the first time he has brought this up you would understand why someone might not want him to continue to posting. :) I don't care if he posts at all.. My biggest beef is he is crying about PvP were PvP isn't the issue. He is upset about the upcoming basket changes and saying that the Devs are favoring the PvP'rs but what does looting a basket out in the open have to do with PvP? Nothing......

Exactly, you get how frustrating that is? I could pick apart your post but I assume it was written this way to entice a fight so I am not going to bite. :)

My only concern now if all the containers are going to be safe which I have on me? because on Xsyon front page of Features, under combat section, states this ""Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons."" if it stays this way I have little problem but the problem could be dealt with.

I am arguing because MrDDT said that all baskets will be looted even those that are in use.

[Hodo]

I think you don't know the meaning of 'FFA'. Which means FREE FOR ALL, there is no O which is optional in there. FFA PVP does not mean optional PVP. Seriously...

Well said here, thank you for pointing out the amount of fail in his post.


Also I remember reading another idea someone had. A flag that is set at character creation that cannot be changed. You set it to either PvP or non-PvP.

One major problem with this, and I have seen it in other games where this happens. You get two groups that go to "War" over something, Group A will use their non-PvP flagged toons to spy and harrass Group B. This leads to a greifing and or non-PvP trash talking war, which leads to heated tempers, poor choices, and the exploitation of game mechanics and possible use of hacks or cheats to change the flagging status of their toons.

Znaiika and anyone else who doesnt like the current system read below.

The current system is fine, if your on your tribal lands you're safe. If your off your lands your free game. So time to earn your foward mounted eyes and be a preditor and not a prey. After all prey have their eyes on the sides of their heads so they can see infront and behind.

Humans, which is what most of you are I hope, have your eyes placed in the front of your head, so you can gauge distance, and better track movement of prey. We have sharp front teeth so we can eat meat of fallen prey, we invented tools that allow us to become better killers, we are the apex preditor on land. If you want to try and change that because its a game, perhaps this type of game is not for you.

[banden]

My only concern now if all the containers are going to be safe which I have on me? because on Xsyon front page of Features, under combat section, states this ""Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons."" if it stays this way I have little problem but the problem could be dealt with.

I am arguing because MrDDT said that all baskets will be looted even those that are in use.

"Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons."

I dont actually think DDT said that baskets in use will be lootable but then if you left the basket on the ground then you are not really using it are you? No you cant loot a basket that is currently in use and Im sure that wont change since its not of any consequence at all. It clearly refers to game mechanics, because otherwise "in use" can mean just about anything. If it reffered to permissions then it would say "unless permitted".

@ Book, I can usually manage a reasonable discussion, if the people know what they are talking about and argue with well-reasoned arguements. If you read znaiikas posts, you will notice that this is not the case, he simply doesnt know the game well enough and argues for his own petty little issues. So should we humour the fool? No, ignore as best you can and if he keeps it up treat him like the fool he is.

[MrDDT]

My only concern now if all the containers are going to be safe which I have on me? because on Xsyon front page of Features, under combat section, states this ""Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons."" if it stays this way I have little problem but the problem could be dealt with.

I am arguing because MrDDT said that all baskets will be looted even those that are in use.


"in use" = on your person. You have 5 slots for pouches and a backpack/bin.

If you drop it, its not in use. Also if you have the basket open would be considered "in use"

[Jadzia]

"in use" = on your person. You have 5 slots for pouches and a backpack/bin.

If you drop it, its not in use. Also if you have the basket open would be considered "in use"

So if you kill a player you cannot loot the baskets/bins he was carrying on himself ?

[MrDDT]

So if you kill a player you cannot loot the baskets/bins he was carrying on himself ?

Go read the features.
"Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons."

They are talking about taking the baskets not looting the items inside.

[Willowhawk]

So time to earn your foward mounted eyes and be a preditor and not a prey. After all prey have their eyes on the sides of their heads so they can see infront and behind.

Sorry to correct this Hodo, but I hate to see bad facts. This is a common misconception. Grazers have their eyes on the side of their heads so they can see what is chasing them and not all carnivores have forward facing eyes. Examples are most fish, Sharks, Reptiles and Amphibians because these too need to see around them.

Primates (and Humans) however have eyes in front because they have opposable thumbs which they use to climb trees to safety and they need eyes in front to see what they are climbing. If a primate (or human) tried to run from a predator they become lunch so they climb for safety. By the same token if a human tried to run down an animal to kill it he can't. Not until tools and weapons did we become predators. Imagine a person running down a animal, taking it down, rending the flesh from it's bones with their teeth and then eating the meat raw. That is what predators (carnivores) do. Humans did not become predators (Killers) until they learned to make tools and weapons. Before tools and weapons, we too were prey.

[Hodo]

Sorry to correct this Hodo, but I hate to see bad facts. This is a common misconception. Grazers have their eyes on the side of their heads so they can see what is chasing them and not all carnivores have forward facing eyes. Examples are most fish, Sharks, Reptiles and Amphibians because these too need to see around them.

Primates (and Humans) however have eyes in front because they have opposable thumbs which they use to climb trees to safety and they need eyes in front to see what they are climbing. If a primate (or human) tried to run from a predator they become lunch so they climb for safety. By the same token if a human tried to run down an animal to kill it he can't. Not until tools and weapons did we become predators. Imagine a person running down a animal, taking it down, rending the flesh from it's bones with their teeth and then eating the meat raw. That is what predators (carnivores) do. Humans did not become predators (Killers) until they learned to make tools and weapons. Before tools and weapons, we too were prey.

Land based animals and creatures that use sight in hunting. And sorry but fish dont use sight as a primary hunting technique. And before tools we were still predators, but there is always something higher on the food chain.

But you are right it is a common misconception.

[znaiika]

"in use" = on your person. You have 5 slots for pouches and a backpack/bin.

If you drop it, its not in use. Also if you have the basket open would be considered "in use"

And what dose that post mean in "lost interest in this game thread"?
You stated in post 23, ""Yes your baskets are lootable if you die."" what dose this mean?

I understand this "Players can fully loot others players but can't take containers in use or special pre-order weapons." as follows, whatever container I have equipped no one can take them or loot them, if you have pre-order item equipped in your hand other players can't take those as well.

[Willowhawk]

Land based animals and creatures that use sight in hunting. And sorry but fish dont use sight as a primary hunting technique. And before tools we were still predators, but there is always something higher on the food chain.

But you are right it is a common misconception.
Well the first sentence isn't even a sentence so I have no idea what that means. And Fish do primarily use sight to hunt. Hence flashy lures. Ever troll and get a huge hit? No that fish didn't smell my metal lure or my rubber worm it saw flashy fast going by. Yes SOME fish hunt by smell, but very few. And if humans were predators before we had developed intellectually enough to make weapons, how did they catch and kill prey? We were omnivore but only because we would eat bugs and some carrion. For the most part we ate like primates. Yes we have evolved into killers, but by nature we did not start that way.

Anyway my original reason for posting was to clarify that our forward facing eyes are not because we are predators but because we have a thumb to grab things with.

[Hodo]

Well the first sentence isn't even a sentence so I have no idea what that means. And Fish do primarily use sight to hunt. Hence flashy lures. Ever troll and get a huge hit? No that fish didn't smell my metal lure or my rubber worm it saw flashy fast going by. Yes SOME fish hunt by smell, but very few. And if humans were predators before we had developed intellectually enough to make weapons, how did they catch and kill prey? We were omnivore but only because we would eat bugs and some carrion. For the most part we ate like primates. Yes we have evolved into killers, but by nature we did not start that way.

Anyway my original reason for posting was to clarify that our forward facing eyes are not because we are predators but because we have a thumb to grab things with.

Sorry I shouldnt post while on my Kindle, and multi-tasking.