A major concern.....xyson 2 carebear

[AlexTaldren]

I always get a good laugh at these so-called hardcore MMORPG "PvPers." They point and cry "carebear" simply because it pumps their ego, but at the end of the day, how "hardcore" is someone who sits in front of their PC, tab-targetting other players?

Anyway, there might be a way for both sides to be okay. If sieging tribes is ever implemented, the system should promote the annexation of smaller tribes, leaving the smaller tribe's development standing.

Tribe vs. Tribe Example:

Tribe A attacks Tribe B. B loses the war and their totem is conquered. Tribe A can then choose from a few options:

1. Annexation - Tribe B becomes a city-state of Tribe A. Tribe A can initiate some form of taxation on Tribe B that lasts for a set amount of time.
2. Assimilation - Tribe A requests that B assimilate into A. This initiates a vote among the members of Tribe B. If the vote passes successfully, all B members are moved into the roster of A, and the territory controlled by B is now controlled by A. Tribe B is dissolved permanently. If the vote fails, the conditions default to Annexation.
3. Pillage - Tribe A receives a certain amount of resources from Tribe B, but B gets to keep its independence and territory. Tribe B may incur some building destruction or damage, but this only requires them to do minor rebuilding and upkeep, not a complete rebuild.

This is a rough list of options, but it gives us options and political choices.

Declaring Independence

Also, if a Tribe is conquered by another, there should be an option for the conquered tribe to initiate some kind of declaration of independence after a certain period of time. At which point a battle is fought between the two tribes. Whoever wins gets to set the terms, whether it be indepedence or continued subjugation.

Unfortunately, these systems could be easily circumvented by players abandoning Tribes and reforming them with new totems, or by creating new characters. So more thinking need to be done about that.

[Mishima]

Interesting discussion. Those saying 6 months of simply crafting and building is way too long have some valid points; a lot of "peaceful" people will be upset when everything they have built can suddenly be taken away from them by aggressive people who own them in combat and have no regrets destroying just for the hell of it.

Coming from Mortal Online however, I'm looking at it from a different perspective. That game portrays itself as a sandbox, yet it started out with nothing but PvP (well, crafting and gathering, but that is only done to serve PvP). It still has nothing but PvP going for it. Housing is in, but it lacks purpose, keeps are in, but they lack purpose. Territory control is in, but it lack purpose. You can't interact with the world, you can't really change it in any interesting way. You can claim land, but it makes no difference. You can declare war, but there's no way of actually winning it, except by destroying everything your opponent has built and make him ragequit. And even if you do that, you haven't really gained anything in game.

The result: bored players killing each other over and over for no apparent reason. A pretty static world where some empty and useless player structures are standing around, waiting to get smashed.

A lot of people came to MO because they wanted a sandbox game. A lot of them left because the game has remained a glorified deathmatch arena all along - much like DFO except that MO's combat has been fucked up most of the time (one of the reasons for the lack of non-PvP content is that the devs have been forced to tweak the extremely complex combat system forever, postponing everything else). Random, meaningless PKing rules supreme since there is nothing more rewarding to do, and since there is no heavy penalty for killing innocents; murder counts and red flags have no real impact. There are no trading tools, no empire building tools, no social tools, no fluff, no vanity or RP stuff, nothing. Of course the devs keep saying it's coming soon, but the fact is that MO remains a PvP game, not a sandbox game featuring PvP.

I think it could have been way different if MO had started out with some real, working sandbox tools, and then implemented combat-related features after a while. It's gonna be interesting to see what happens in Xsyon, which seems to be doing just that.

[FabricSoftener]

In all fairness if someone really want to proove themselves in pvp Darkfall really is the game to do that. If I was hard core pvp player I really would be somewhat embarased to say I am king of Xyson pvp but not Darkfall.
Something to ponder.

[Vadio]

@Fabricsoftener Remeber several change in combat soon(after release near tribal warfare i think)
*maybe PVPpack :P
@AlexTaldren i like
Develop more concept and post ( in another thread )
@topic and carebear or not , dont care people are freedom to chosen path

[FabricSoftener]

@Fabricsoftener Remeber several change in combat soon(after release near tribal warfare i think)

Yeah but I very much doubt it will ever come close to this:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DFValroth

I am not putting Xyson down in fact I think I like the game, I am just saying for hard core pvp empire action, this would not be that game given darkfall is in the market place

[Vadio]

i know about valroth ( i ex player DF , sold account 1 moth ago )

and agree in some aspect

Maybe darkfall in pvp aspect Unquestionable
Of course i know Xsyon more similiar minecraft/wurm

But one game without pvp impossible my vision ,
Possible create mechanics to prevent grief and avoid pvp
But Siege/Warfare/Arena is cool add to game

[blake378]

That is always the fallback statement of a "carebear".

If anything, the "PvPers" are wanting more dynamic gameplay.

as far as for the carebear comment this is not true. i was top of my alliance in eve 2 years running in pvp kills and solo kills overall. in uo i lived in fel and pvped constantly. all im saying is from my experience in pvp over the years in all games its coming to the place that pvpers just want easy kills they dont want to fight they just want to gank and grief. ive been on both sides of this for instance in eve if a fight is going to be equal numbers most people wont fight because they know they might now win. same way with uo it turned into one guild on a server just ganking everyone that came to try to do spawns. there are very few pvpers that want to fight they just want kills. ive been on both sides of this and i can take a loss but yes i am a carebear at heart when the time comes.

[BigCountry]

So for those currently playing, outside of PvP, what is the point of this game? Who can construct the largest house? Are there reward points for building things or something? Is it nothing but a 3D farmville or is there an actual purpose in playing the game? I pre-ordered and I am ready to try, but would like to know what I am getting into. The FAQ page made it sound like this was a sandbox PvP game, so I signed on. Not to grieve or what not, but to play/compete against other players, via solo or group (a "sandbox" should offer both) etc.

[Potapithikos]

Really interested in what this game has to offer however i am too perplexed by this... if anyone can provide information regarding the following questions i would greatly appreciate it.

What makes belongings matter then?

Will Tribe lands be subject to attacks from enviroment (animals, monsters, etc, adverse conditions like weather) and people need to defend to protect their constructions or maintain or rebuild the damages?

Will survival without hte threat of tribal warfare be challenging enough to provide incentives?

[esudar]

the point is to play together with people.
chat and coordinate what everybodys job is... build your tribe.

there is no competition or whatsoever atm tho.
no rewards i think, barely interaction with people outside of your tribe