PvP vs. PK and some general impressions

[PANZERBUNNY]

Jadzia wrote:

necoo wrote:

you ppl are quite irritating as what you want is just pure gain without any loss... without loss is there any point trying to gain something if there is no risk involved is there any point to continue to try... where is the point in that if all you do is build up and up and up will the tower really be able to hold such weight, would it not collapse. stop being so selfish if you want to gain something you must take the appropriate risk... less the purpose be lost

Honestly, I don't understand this selfish thing. Is it selfish if you work in real and you keep your salary and don't want thieves to steal it ? I don't want to cause any harm to any of the players...is that selfish ? If others want to steal what I've worked for their side seems to be selfish for me...

And I'm not trying to convince you that my playstyle is fun for you. Probably its not. You have the choice to play as you like, I'm not stopping you. Why do you want to stop me to play in the way I like ?

Because the game is an "open concept game". We the players dictate the playing field, the political maneuvering and the towns/cities throughout the game world.

we build the world and we'll destroy it.(if it comes to that.)

I'm not trying to take away your fun from the game, I'm simply putting it out there that for this game to be open and truly evolve you'll have to take the lumps with the candy.
Whats that saying..something about cake and eating it too?

Jadzia it sounds like you want a full crafting and gathering system where you can help build a world without interference. Sorry to say, but that just isn't going to happen here. I'm even thinking that them "maybe" opening another server down the road for strictly PVE wont even happen. They'll have a hard time keeping everything else rolling.

Toss your lot in with a large tribe that can protect you etc and I'm sure open PVP etc wont effect you much.

Question: What would you do if we had to flag ourselves for PVP and another person comes along and starts griefing your spawn or knocking on your resource nodes while you are? What are your options? How do you protect the integrity of your gathering experience with NO way to deal with the "protected griefers/annoyances"?

Yours is only what you can claim with the length of your sword.

[Jadzia]

PANZERBUNNY wrote:

Because the game is an "open concept game". We the players dictate the playing field, the political maneuvering and the towns/cities throughout the game world.

we build the world and we'll destroy it.(if it comes to that.)

Thats your understanding about the game, but I'm not sure you are right. Xsyon's posts, the feature list and every official announcement shows that the developers' focus is not PvP, but world building, exploring, researching new technologies. But I really don't want to start another pointless fight on this, we obviously can't convince each others.

I'm not trying to take away your fun from the game, I'm simply putting it out there that for this game to be open and truly evolve you'll have to take the lumps with the candy.
Whats that saying..something about cake and eating it too?

Jadzia it sounds like you want a full crafting and gathering system where you can help build a world without interference. Sorry to say, but that just isn't going to happen here. I'm even thinking that them "maybe" opening another server down the road for strictly PVE wont even happen. They'll have a hard time keeping everything else rolling.

Toss your lot in with a large tribe that can protect you etc and I'm sure open PVP etc wont effect you much.

Question: What would you do if we had to flag ourselves for PVP and another person comes along and starts griefing your spawn or knocking on your resource nodes while you are? What are your options? How do you protect the integrity of your gathering experience with NO way to deal with the "protected griefers/annoyances"?

Yours is only what you can claim with the length of your sword.

I have played games with gathering, building and no FFA PVP. I've met the problem you mentioned a lot of times...and I can tell you you don't need a sword to reach your goals or to get your ore. Most of the times we became friends with those griefers...you underrate the power of diplomacy, humor, friendship. During 5 years of gaming I've met 1 player who weren't willing to listen.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

[necoo]

Jadzia wrote:

PANZERBUNNY wrote:

Because the game is an "open concept game". We the players dictate the playing field, the political maneuvering and the towns/cities throughout the game world.

we build the world and we'll destroy it.(if it comes to that.)

Thats your understanding about the game, but I'm not sure you are right. Xsyon's posts, the feature list and every official announcement shows that the developers' focus is not PvP, but world building, exploring, researching new technologies. But I really don't want to start another pointless fight on this, we obviously can't convince each others.

I'm not trying to take away your fun from the game, I'm simply putting it out there that for this game to be open and truly evolve you'll have to take the lumps with the candy.
Whats that saying..something about cake and eating it too?

Jadzia it sounds like you want a full crafting and gathering system where you can help build a world without interference. Sorry to say, but that just isn't going to happen here. I'm even thinking that them "maybe" opening another server down the road for strictly PVE wont even happen. They'll have a hard time keeping everything else rolling.

Toss your lot in with a large tribe that can protect you etc and I'm sure open PVP etc wont effect you much.

Question: What would you do if we had to flag ourselves for PVP and another person comes along and starts griefing your spawn or knocking on your resource nodes while you are? What are your options? How do you protect the integrity of your gathering experience with NO way to deal with the "protected griefers/annoyances"?

Yours is only what you can claim with the length of your sword.

I have played games with gathering, building and no FFA PVP. I've met the problem you mentioned a lot of times...and I can tell you you don't need a sword to reach your goals or to get your ore. Most of the times we became friends with those griefers...you underrate the power of diplomacy, humor, friendship. During 5 years of gaming I've met 1 player who weren't willing to listen.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

it is nice to have the option to smack the guy a few times if it comes down to it doesn't it
oh and aren't you overestimating the potential of diplomacy... not everything can be solved with words...
on a side note would a world that never had any war really be so grand?

[Jadzia]

necoo wrote:

Jadzia wrote:

I have played games with gathering, building and no FFA PVP. I've met the problem you mentioned a lot of times...and I can tell you you don't need a sword to reach your goals or to get your ore. Most of the times we became friends with those griefers...you underrate the power of diplomacy, humor, friendship. During 5 years of gaming I've met 1 player who weren't willing to listen.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

1.it is nice to have the option to smack the guy a few times if it comes down to it doesn't it
2.oh and aren't you overestimating the potential of diplomacy... not everything can be solved with words...
3.on a side note would a world that never had any war really be so grand?

1.No, its not.
2.Much more than with swords.
3.In the game we are just trying to recover from an apocalyps what i bet was caused by a war, isn't it epic enough for you ?

[Zarian]

A lot of what's being discussed isn't truly pvp but pking. Games which implement pvp typically have areas or situations in which pvp is allowed, if not encouraged. I personally love pvp, the competition, the adrenaline, and the teamwork aspects are all enjoyable and exciting. But that form of pvp includes me (a player geared for fighting) vs. another player (whom is also geared for fighting). Open world pvp a little different, implementing a risk feature that no matter where I go, I might be prey for a pker.

No one likes losing loot they've worked hard to get, but everyone likes getting rewards for their effort. If I'm out cutting down trees, I wouldn't mind the occasional thrill of someone sneaking up on me and having to fight to protect my spoils. But if I'm required to look over my shoulder every 5 seconds because people are out rampant pking everyone, there is no game.

The game has mentioned that there are definitely prices for pking people. And if that's held true, then there won't be too many murderers out there. There'll be enough to keep the spark of interest and danger fresh, but not enough to ruin the game. With this in mind we should be able to sleep knowing that basic mechanics have been put into play to keep ruthless pkers to a rarity and not the common player. And if the population of pkers rises to an alarming quantity, it'll be up to us, the players to fight back either with laws or rallied anti-pkers.

I'm definitely excited for this game, more so than probably any other game lately. And I know most of us are drawn to this game for the crafting, the building, the politics, exploring and towns. And that majority will fight back against those who are out to stop us from 'ruining' the game for us.

And it's not selfish for someone to pay for a game hoping that it'll be fun, and fighting for it to continue to entertain them. In fact, telling those people to stop fighting is what's selfish. These forums are for players, or in this case potential players, to discuss and disclose what it is that they enjoy from games, and what they hope that this game will and will not be.

Personally, PVP is good in my book if it's relatively controlled, but PK truly needs to be controlled so people won't lose everything they've worked hard for.


-Hoping for a fun Game where most of these concerns won't be as large as a hassle than what people have posted.

[Jadzia]

necoo wrote:

you completely missed my point...
everytime you step out of your house for work you are taking a risk, there are those out there who would do you wrong for what you have, so why do you step out of your house... becuase you need money by any means you have at your disposal, why do you need money... to buy the food that feeds you and your family in order to live, and so you step outside and take the risk that someone out there might mug you or kill you or do unspeakable things to you... however the ppl who would do those things to you also need to make money to feed themselves and their family. and due to their circumstances the only way to make money for these things is to take money from whatever resources they have available and they take the risk that they might go to jail or worse.

what you want is to be able to get the money to get the food to feed yourself and your family without taking any risk... now that in and of itself isn't necessarily wrong however it is indeed unrealistic and so you are selfish in thinking that you can do these things without taking those risks

Now really, this sounds totally silly. Do you really mean this ? It sounds like you were supporting thieves and murderers in real, because those poor fellows have no choice and they have to feed their family. Weirdest thing I've ever heard. On the other side, do you find this in real life exciting ? interesting ? fun ? If so, I think something is wrong with you....everyone ( not counting the criminals) would LOVE to get rid of all of the crimes in real life. Our world would be a much better place then.

I tried to reply to the second part of your post...but I'm sorry, I can't, I'm simply not able to follow your thinking.

[necoo]

Jadzia wrote:

necoo wrote:

Jadzia wrote:

I have played games with gathering, building and no FFA PVP. I've met the problem you mentioned a lot of times...and I can tell you you don't need a sword to reach your goals or to get your ore. Most of the times we became friends with those griefers...you underrate the power of diplomacy, humor, friendship. During 5 years of gaming I've met 1 player who weren't willing to listen.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

1.it is nice to have the option to smack the guy a few times if it comes down to it doesn't it
2.oh and aren't you overestimating the potential of diplomacy... not everything can be solved with words...
3.on a side note would a world that never had any war really be so grand?

1.No, its not.
2.Much more than with swords.
3.In the game we are just trying to recover from an apocalyps what i bet was caused by a war, isn't it epic enough for you ?

1. think of this scenario some guy is beating the crap out of your girlfriend and raping her... wouldn't it be nice if you could deck the guy once and get away... as it isn't exactly the time to play the diplomat

2 diplomacy can indeed solve more things then swords can however the things that diplomacy can't solve are the most important ones such as the example above and these scenarios can be solved with swords

3 being able to rebuild after an apocalypse is better then being ravaged by disease and hunger due to lack of resources to go around the 15 billion ppl of the world.

now that last one might be a bit confusing so let me explain (you can skip over this if you already understand)

first in a world that never had any war there would be far more people than there is today because no one ever killed them and we are at the top of the food chain so no animal kills us meaning 15 billion people and not the 6.5 billion today

next war has motivated millions (yes millions) of advances in every part of our lives with out it we would be looking at a far less developed world then our own

third with the 15 billion people in the world the amount of space available for agriculture among other things would be dwindled to nearly nothing so there would be less resources like food to go around to the 15 billion ppl

with that in mind there is already not enough food with what the world has now to feed everyone (although there might be if everyone shared [which by the way they don't]) so you take less food then right now and then split it up in 3 times smaller portions then today and you get starvation on a global scale

fourth with the lack of technology medicine would be even further less developed then today so the would would be further rampaged by disease

and this is just to name a few problems that comes up just because there was never war

[Jadzia]

necoo wrote:

1. think of this scenario some guy is beating the crap out of your girlfriend and raping her... wouldn't it be nice if you could deck the guy once and get away... as it isn't exactly the time to play the diplomat

Aren't we talking about the game ? On the side note I'm a woman so having a girlfriend is not likely :P

2 diplomacy can indeed solve more things then swords can however the things that diplomacy can't solve are the most important ones such as the example above and these scenarios can be solved with swords

Personally I believe if we had no option to solve problems with swords we would have way less problems.

3 being able to rebuild after an apocalypse is better then being ravaged by disease and hunger due to lack of resources to go around the 15 billion ppl of the world.

now that last one might be a bit confusing so let me explain (you can skip over this if you already understand)

first in a world that never had any war there would be far more people than there is today because no one ever killed them and we are at the top of the food chain so no animal kills us meaning 15 billion people and not the 6.5 billion today

next war has motivated millions (yes millions) of advances in every part of our lives with out it we would be looking at a far less developed world then our own

third with the 15 billion people in the world the amount of space available for agriculture among other things would be dwindled to nearly nothing so there would be less resources like food to go around to the 15 billion ppl

with that in mind there is already not enough food with what the world has now to feed everyone (although there might be if everyone shared [which by the way they don't]) so you take less food then right now and then split it up in 3 times smaller portions then today and you get starvation on a global scale

fourth with the lack of technology medicine would be even further less developed then today so the would would be further rampaged by disease

and this is just to name a few problems that comes up just because there was never war

The population of our planet has been affected by wars way less than by catastrophes, diseases. The spanish flu has killed way more people than World WarI. And if there were no wars, the humankind wouldn't waste so many lives and money on it...could have used it much better. Perhaps we could have conquered other planets ? ( I'm a sci-fi fan :P ) But to be serious, for me war as a population controlling system is totally unacceptable.

[necoo]

Jadzia wrote:

necoo wrote:

you completely missed my point...
everytime you step out of your house for work you are taking a risk, there are those out there who would do you wrong for what you have, so why do you step out of your house... becuase you need money by any means you have at your disposal, why do you need money... to buy the food that feeds you and your family in order to live, and so you step outside and take the risk that someone out there might mug you or kill you or do unspeakable things to you... however the ppl who would do those things to you also need to make money to feed themselves and their family. and due to their circumstances the only way to make money for these things is to take money from whatever resources they have available and they take the risk that they might go to jail or worse.

what you want is to be able to get the money to get the food to feed yourself and your family without taking any risk... now that in and of itself isn't necessarily wrong however it is indeed unrealistic and so you are selfish in thinking that you can do these things without taking those risks

Now really, this sounds totally silly. Do you really mean this ? It sounds like you were supporting thieves and murderers in real, because those poor fellows have no choice and they have to feed their family. Weirdest thing I've ever heard. On the other side, do you find this in real life exciting ? interesting ? fun ? If so, I think something is wrong with you....everyone ( not counting the criminals) would LOVE to get rid of all of the crimes in real life. Our world would be a much better place then.

I tried to reply to the second part of your post...but I'm sorry, I can't, I'm simply not able to follow your thinking.

you are a fool, who does not understand the implications of what you speak. How many thousands of people do you think would be out of the job without crime, how many millions. and not everything should be handled with consideration to the law. the laws that are made to protect us can vary well get in our way.

would you really stand ideally by wile you and your family are forced out of a home live on the streets with no food as you die in your own filth just because you want to be considerate to the law. do you really have such a strong will to bare with the grief and agony of the loss of everything and the death of all you love just because you didn't want to commit a crime.... not everyone has such a strong will, as for me i would kill without hesitation if the situation ever arises... not that it has

[necoo]

Jadzia wrote:

necoo wrote:

1. think of this scenario some guy is beating the crap out of your girlfriend and raping her... wouldn't it be nice if you could deck the guy once and get away... as it isn't exactly the time to play the diplomat

Aren't we talking about the game ? On the side note I'm a woman so having a girlfriend is not likely :P

2 diplomacy can indeed solve more things then swords can however the things that diplomacy can't solve are the most important ones such as the example above and these scenarios can be solved with swords

Personally I believe if we had no option to solve problems with swords we would have way less problems.

3 being able to rebuild after an apocalypse is better then being ravaged by disease and hunger due to lack of resources to go around the 15 billion ppl of the world.

now that last one might be a bit confusing so let me explain (you can skip over this if you already understand)

first in a world that never had any war there would be far more people than there is today because no one ever killed them and we are at the top of the food chain so no animal kills us meaning 15 billion people and not the 6.5 billion today

next war has motivated millions (yes millions) of advances in every part of our lives with out it we would be looking at a far less developed world then our own

third with the 15 billion people in the world the amount of space available for agriculture among other things would be dwindled to nearly nothing so there would be less resources like food to go around to the 15 billion ppl

with that in mind there is already not enough food with what the world has now to feed everyone (although there might be if everyone shared [which by the way they don't]) so you take less food then right now and then split it up in 3 times smaller portions then today and you get starvation on a global scale

fourth with the lack of technology medicine would be even further less developed then today so the would would be further rampaged by disease

and this is just to name a few problems that comes up just because there was never war

The population of our planet has been affected by wars way less than by catastrophes, diseases. The spanish flu has killed way more people than World WarI. And if there were no wars, the humankind wouldn't waste so many lives and money on it...could have used it much better. Perhaps we could have conquered other planets ? ( I'm a sci-fi fan :P ) But to be serious, for me war as a population controlling system is totally unacceptable.

if there was never war we would have never even have reach the moon... let alone other planets... it seems you completely skipped the explanations about the lack of technological advancement due to the motivation that is war..... oh and in such a world the Spanish flu may have killed off the entire planet because of the lack of medical know how... which was developed because of war

oh and excuse my double post i didn't notice till after i submitted it