PvP and food for thought

[Jadzia]

Risk wrote:

Im for the sector'ish based pvp style that was mentioned earlier.

Many a 100% pvp game started and crashed because players were getting ganked even before they knew how to open their inventory.

A base starting zone to get ones feet wet and to understand the fundamentals would be a huge advantage to keeping players that can later hold their own in the game.

Plus there's a big problem when only having PC's guarding Tribe territory..namely that tribes off time. Unless it's a zerg tribe, many will have people from their RW geographical regions, for grouping etc..

This will lead to other groups simply walking in on the off time and destroying everything with 0% risk..and PvP without Risk is just *farty sound* :laugh:

I feel a great future game mechanic would be to incorporate tribe npc guards..who's (skills/strengths/numbers) are based on a combination of the tribes and a tax brought in from the members.
The stonger the tribe the stronger the guards, and the tax's will help with a money sink...Crap taxes and a bee could kill em...Insane taxes and members will leave dropping the guard S/S/N as well.

The game is planned to be free from griefing-ganking, so I guess killing new players in the starting zone will be out of the question

And NPC city guards are planned in the future.

Xsyon wrote:

4. Will there be NPC guards for player tribal cities/villages?

Currently no. There is a planned system for the future, but again I can't reveal the details until they are implemented.

[Risk]

aye aye..im just saying there's no harm converting a winning system to a fantasy base...Eve was a looser...they started at basics and take on WOW these days..let's kill WOW on our side!

[pid73]

Risk wrote:

This will lead to other groups simply walking in on the off time and destroying everything with 0% risk..and PvP without Risk is just *farty sound* :laugh:

It's normal that PvP players attack smaller foes, picking less risk. When they band up they do it because alone they cannot PK the higher enemy. So, in other words, PvP is always a question of risk assessment. Believe me, most would just accept that 0% risk if the rewards are the same. the other way around is not true, nobody would accept the same risk for no reward.

PvP is not about heroism, the "code fo the warrior", having the guts, being "da man" or whatever, it's about adrenaline in a way that you don't get hurt while the other does. It's about smashing with a tank over a minicar and looting it's trunk.

[Okie]

pid73 wrote:

Risk wrote:

This will lead to other groups simply walking in on the off time and destroying everything with 0% risk..and PvP without Risk is just *farty sound* :laugh:

It's normal that PvP players attack smaller foes, picking less risk. When they band up they do it because alone they cannot PK the higher enemy. So, in other words, PvP is always a question of risk assessment. Believe me, most would just accept that 0% risk if the rewards are the same. the other way around is not true, nobody would accept the same risk for no reward.

PvP is not about heroism, the "code fo the warrior", having the guts, being "da man" or whatever, it's about adrenaline in a way that you don't get hurt while the other does. It's about smashing with a tank over a minicar and looting it's trunk.

Dont try and explain pvp if your against it and an overall carebear. Open pvp is the only reason why I bought this game stop qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn I have already been warned about about my language so im tryn to be on my best behavior but yall are making it hard.

[Cunk]

You bought the game for a single feature?

[Veldern]

pid73 wrote:

It's about smashing with a tank over a minicar and looting it's trunk.

Love it... siggied in fact.

[Derek]

I'm all for open PvP. I love it in fact. BUT, I think there should be some kind of "High Sec" protection for newbies learning the game and tribes that have had their asses handed to them that need a place to regroup and lick their wounds.

Otherwise, you end up with what you have in Darkfall - Top PvP clans and a couple zerg clans that survived the onslaught and that's about it. Population will slowly dwindle.

Just think of how fun the game would still be if alliances like Hyperion were still around to beat on? They go into the "High Sec" area to regroup, and do their role playing thing. Then after morale has improved they make their move again to claim more valuable real estate and resources.

The only reason I can think of for people to be against this is because they are afraid of fair competition. They would rather gank newbies all day or beat up on tribes that are already demoralized and have lost too many members to defend themselves.

After all, it is still open PvP minus ganking the newbies and tribes that would have otherwise left the game for good. If you can still rape, pillage, and shit stomp anyone in the "Low Sec" areas, and get better rewards for doing so - what is the problem? Afraid of a little competition?

[Jadzia]

Okie wrote:

pid73 wrote:

Risk wrote:

This will lead to other groups simply walking in on the off time and destroying everything with 0% risk..and PvP without Risk is just *farty sound* :laugh:

It's normal that PvP players attack smaller foes, picking less risk. When they band up they do it because alone they cannot PK the higher enemy. So, in other words, PvP is always a question of risk assessment. Believe me, most would just accept that 0% risk if the rewards are the same. the other way around is not true, nobody would accept the same risk for no reward.

PvP is not about heroism, the "code fo the warrior", having the guts, being "da man" or whatever, it's about adrenaline in a way that you don't get hurt while the other does. It's about smashing with a tank over a minicar and looting it's trunk.

Dont try and explain pvp if your against it and an overall carebear. Open pvp is the only reason why I bought this game stop qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn I have already been warned about about my language so im tryn to be on my best behavior but yall are making it hard.

I just hope you won't badmouth the game if it turns out to be something very different than you thought it would.

[Ciik]

Relandi wrote:

Jalisar wrote:

Thought the game was open pvp with astringent penalties? Your idea is fine, but why not wait and let the man work and see what his intentions are first?

Agreed.

How about we see what Jooky actually has in mind before you start telling him what will work better.

Personally - I'm against safe zones, and I find it even pretty ridiculous they are being added for the entire tribal area in Prelude, but that's for another topic.

Add the ability to take steps to safeguard your tribal area, sure - but to plain old say it's a "safe zone" or to even just add "safe zones" is rather contradictory to the "open PvP with severe consequences" that Jooky has been toting.

Safe zones =/= Open PvP. (and in what Apocalypse have you heard of fucking safe zones?.. oh, such a catastrophe *rolls eyes* )

Regardless, I'm gunna stay outta this thread after this post, this topics been talked about too much and we don't even have the slightest clue how it will truly work.

As mentioned repeatedly, severe penalties for pvp outside of having a dance-card, or some type of invitation to be aggressive. Does the severity of that 'concept' begin to loosen as we progress past prelude? We dont know. But it does leave more questions than answers, and leaves more that find free-form, organic sandboxy mmo environment growth appealing, with concerns about short-term or long-term interest.

Its appealing to think of a game that releases with a mostly-empty sandbox mechanic with some dev-controlled safeguards as everyone gets settled into prelude and in preparation for future chapters, but where the focus of the mid-to endgame perhaps is on player cooperation and conflicts not presided over by the devs.

Jadzia wrote:

I just hope you won't badmouth the game if it turns out to be something very different than you thought it would.

The Indie appreciative players are on the fringe of the mmo market as opposed to the mainstream, typically not following or grovelling at the pve or rvr heavy themeparks, but more widely interested in orgainic environments rather than heavily scripted or severely dev-controlled environments.

I also find this Indie market of players to be very aware of all Indie projects, and very vocally honest about their likes and dislikes.

So expect honest vocal appraisals of this or any other title, regardless of whether someone spins it as being overly flamboyantly fanboish or badmouthing.

[sicarius]

Ciik wrote:

Relandi wrote:

Jalisar wrote:

Thought the game was open pvp with astringent penalties? Your idea is fine, but why not wait and let the man work and see what his intentions are first?

Agreed.

How about we see what Jooky actually has in mind before you start telling him what will work better.

Personally - I'm against safe zones, and I find it even pretty ridiculous they are being added for the entire tribal area in Prelude, but that's for another topic.

Add the ability to take steps to safeguard your tribal area, sure - but to plain old say it's a "safe zone" or to even just add "safe zones" is rather contradictory to the "open PvP with severe consequences" that Jooky has been toting.

Safe zones =/= Open PvP. (and in what Apocalypse have you heard of fucking safe zones?.. oh, such a catastrophe *rolls eyes* )

Regardless, I'm gunna stay outta this thread after this post, this topics been talked about too much and we don't even have the slightest clue how it will truly work.

As mentioned repeatedly, severe penalties for pvp outside of having a dance-card, or some type of invitation to be aggressive. Does the severity of that 'concept' begin to loosen as we progress past prelude? We dont know. But it does leave more questions than answers, and leaves more that find free-form, organic sandboxy mmo environment growth appealing, with concerns about short-term or long-term interest.

Its appealing to think of a game that releases with a mostly-empty sandbox mechanic with some dev-controlled safeguards as everyone gets settled into prelude and in preparation for future chapters, but where the focus of the mid-to endgame perhaps is on player cooperation and conflicts not presided over by the devs.

Jadzia wrote:

I just hope you won't badmouth the game if it turns out to be something very different than you thought it would.

The Indie appreciative players are on the fringe of the mmo market as opposed to the mainstream, typically not following or grovelling at the pve or rvr heavy themeparks, but more widely interested in orgainic environments rather than heavily scripted or severely dev-controlled environments.

I also find this Indie market of players to be very aware of all Indie projects, and very vocally honest about their likes and dislikes.

So expect honest vocal appraisals of this or any other title, regardless of whether someone spins it as being overly flamboyantly fanboish or badmouthing.

I would just like to point out for a moment that this post is more or less a perfect post, so far as argument posts go. Intelligent arguments, put forth with quotes, tied in well together. Its a shame that so many people on the internet don't take the time to flush out posts like this.

Pro is all I can say.

But to move along I agree, I believe during the prelude period there will be stricter dev control. I don't blame them, they are simply acting as the police of the game, and during this early period they are simply going to see if things run smoothly, and with tighter control they can reroute or change anything that begins to go wrong.

Not that I want to compare to DF again but their devs did the same thing, and I feel that the launch of DF was one of the smoothest I've ever participated in. Almost no server crashes, massive bugs, flocks of exploiters destroying the game right off the bat. It was pleasant until of course thousands of ganks raided noob towns.

Point being is that if there is to be more strict control from devs so be it, as long as it is for the interest of the players in early stages, with eventual release of said control to a minimum level.