Can anyone link the official statment about this, can't seem to find anything about it.
My initial thoughts though are WHY?
I thought prelude was an initial 'building of the social foundations' to prepare for when artificial restrictions are removed. This seems like a really bad idea.
Again, the players will choose what they know. They will interpret Peace as PvE and War as PvP. They are already doing it. It does not matter what the technical definition is. As you know, this is a sandbox game, and nothing like most other MMOs out there. In this game, the player, their attitudes, their goals, their vision IS the gameplay. When you polarize the population like this, I believe you will get a watered down version of the game on both servers. This seems acceptable to the devs, and that is their choice. Only time will tell now that the decision has been made.
No. not at all.
- Players that seek a world based on tribal warfare and conflict should choose the War server. That's the direction that server will evolve. Again, it will NOT be a Chaos free for all server. Players that want less danger and future consentual tribal PvP should choose the Peace server. The goal here is one of choices and balance.
In Bold is the system that makes the server's Worlds away from each other.
con·sen·tu·al
–adjective Law .
Involving or carried out by mutual consent: a consentual divorce.
This would be a brilliant insight if the whole community wasn't already doing this. Read the posts. PvP people are going to the War server and PvE people are going to the Peace server. I'm not dreaming it up. Ask them yourself. In this game, the PEOPLE are the content, not the game mechanics. This isn't a Themepark.
At any rate, I have said my piece. I'll leave it to others to discuss now.
OK I have read the statment about this and now I REALLY think this is a bad idea.
Keep the safe zones until you have the code in place to allow people to protect themselves via construction and/or laws and punishment systems. Splitting servers will simply mean a poorer game. And to be honest, I expect the griefer types to actively use the peaceful server to continue being azzhats rather then join the war server where they will probably find their butts handed to them as people will be more designed for combat.
Bad move imo.
people saying PvPers are pissed because they cant gank carebears is outright unintelligent. Thats like saying countries go to war just so they can slaughter civilians. PvPers wanted a world with some conflict. In a perfect world every tribe would have PvP bodyguards/armies so that everyone one could war everyone and have a decent fight. Maybe the weaker side would call on some allies to aid them creating neat world wars.
Instead you have one server with no conflict where the crafters are, and one server will chaos far behind in technology with no crafters. Why would a crafter want to come to a server were they get ganked waiting for their basket to open, just to spawn at their totem and get ganked again.
No one is going back on what they said, we never wanted a chaos server, we wanted BALANCE. Ya know like if 2 tribes border eachother if gives both tribes a territory claim casus belli. Or if a tribe has been encroaching on your land if gives the victim a trespassing casus belli, Or if a tribe attacked your tribe member in the wild the victim gets an aggression casus belli. Hell if a tribemember farts in your general direction you can get a insult casus belli if you want.
See that? Instant balance. Prevents warmongering tribes from going around wreaking everyone, while creating nice conflict. Victoria II and Europa Universalis have better war/peace balance than this game, and they are singleplayer games.