PvP vs. PK and some general impressions

[sisler86]

VowOfSilence wrote:

Palo god wrote:

VowOfSilence wrote:
I'd suggest a karma system, stat loss when killed depends on how much bad karma you have. Max bad karma takes quite a while to reach, but means 100% skill loss.

Bad karma is gained for ganking, looting items, defeating players of lower level and combat skills, if there is no war declaration, and so on. It should also depend on the karma of the victim and the owner of the territory.

Bad karma gained is exponential, so simply looting some items would be a minimal gain if nothing else factors in.

No one will go red if it means 100% skill loss, and thus will be a pointless mechanic. A game with no bad guys is no fun. If you gank players people will just put bounties on your head in game.

Well, no one will kill and loot newbies all day long, and that's the whole point. Unless the killer is skilled enough to get away with it in the long run - in that case, we'll have a "Jack the Ripper"-legend now and then. But most thieves/murderers will plan their attacks instead to make sure that their coup actually pays off.

Maybe there could be a system in place that prevents you from PvP'ng until you reach a certain level. That would protect the new players. I'm sure someone will have some decent counter arguments for that, but it's just something that kinda popped into my head.

[Seizon]

Excuse my newbishness;
In my own opinion,
Open PvP encourages teamwork and evokes a sense of danger. For instance; crafters will obviously be targets because of the relationship between the two; the pvper produces nothing but requires something, and has developed a means to obtain it, while the crafter produces things but (usually) lacks the means to properly defend it. Because of this, warriors aligned to an organization will find they have an important job; protect the crafters.
Town guard KoS list (Karma system featured in the game could also help accomplish town security should a PvPer's karma drop too low, causing NPCs to attack.) and/or other mechanicisms would of course be welcome in aiding the defense against PvPers, and ways to protect items, such as locked containers and/or 'bound' important items, so to speak, which could last for one or two deaths before requiring a new 'bind'.

Restricting a sandbox game reduces player enjoyment, imo, and while dying may be frustrating, a game without death is hard to pull off, especially in such a player oriented game. (ATITD is an obvious exception.) Even restricted PK/only animal deaths could be less preferable compare to open PvP.
on another note;
Automatic game punishment of pvpers would also make the mechanic a much less enjoyable one, whereas player-imposed punishments assisted by game mechanics can be quite satisfying and add an element of danger to the pvper as well.

Hope I could at least make one point there.

[Jhael]

sisler86 wrote:

VowOfSilence wrote:

Palo god wrote:

VowOfSilence wrote:
I'd suggest a karma system, stat loss when killed depends on how much bad karma you have. Max bad karma takes quite a while to reach, but means 100% skill loss.

Bad karma is gained for ganking, looting items, defeating players of lower level and combat skills, if there is no war declaration, and so on. It should also depend on the karma of the victim and the owner of the territory.

Bad karma gained is exponential, so simply looting some items would be a minimal gain if nothing else factors in.

No one will go red if it means 100% skill loss, and thus will be a pointless mechanic. A game with no bad guys is no fun. If you gank players people will just put bounties on your head in game.

Well, no one will kill and loot newbies all day long, and that's the whole point. Unless the killer is skilled enough to get away with it in the long run - in that case, we'll have a "Jack the Ripper"-legend now and then. But most thieves/murderers will plan their attacks instead to make sure that their coup actually pays off.

Maybe there could be a system in place that prevents you from PvP'ng until you reach a certain level. That would protect the new players. I'm sure someone will have some decent counter arguments for that, but it's just something that kinda popped into my head.

I'm sorry, the levels-the-what-now? :huh:
*cough* No counterargument required... :silly:
EDIT: But lets counter anyway.
Minimum "Level" requirements in a sandbox type of play? Are you out of your mind? That's everything that term goes against...

[sisler86]

Seizon wrote:

Excuse my newbishness;
In my own opinion,
Open PvP encourages teamwork and evokes a sense of danger. For instance; crafters will obviously be targets because of the relationship between the two; the pvper produces nothing but requires something, and has developed a means to obtain it, while the crafter produces things but (usually) lacks the means to properly defend it. Because of this, warriors aligned to an organization will find they have an important job; protect the crafters.

That's using the assumption that everyone that plays MMO's does so for the social aspect of them. Some people aren't social butterflies like others and would prefer to play on their own and not get too involved with their tribe.

[Seizon]

sisler86 wrote:

Seizon wrote:

Excuse my newbishness;
In my own opinion,
Open PvP encourages teamwork and evokes a sense of danger. For instance; crafters will obviously be targets because of the relationship between the two; the pvper produces nothing but requires something, and has developed a means to obtain it, while the crafter produces things but (usually) lacks the means to properly defend it. Because of this, warriors aligned to an organization will find they have an important job; protect the crafters.

That's using the assumption that everyone that plays MMO's does so for the social aspect of them. Some people aren't social butterflies like others and would prefer to play on their own and not get too involved with their tribe.

It seems that this game encourages cooperation, however I'm sure lone-wolfing it would be preferable to some players.
Their life would of course be harder, because doing it all with one person and scratching out much more then basic requirements for surviving isn't too easy. (especially with skill degrade!)
PKers wouldn't have much of a reason to target these people unless they're doing exceptionally well, in that case, it'd be in the solo player's best interst to have some good fighting equipment.

[Kitsume]

I don't think limiting PvP from a certain group will solve any problems, it usually causes more problems that it is worth with players abusing that immunity.

What I am looking for is open-PvP but with ways to encourage the PvPers to fight other PvPers. Sure there will be some players no matter what the incentive will go for the easy kills, but if you make those type of kills less attractive, then some of them might try more challenging targets.

I've never said eliminate PvP for any group, but I do strongly dislike those players that seek out to Grief/Gank other players who are weaker than themselves for the easy kill with little to no risk to themselves. Some people choose to make a positive impact on the world, some choose to make a negative impact. I think these choices should reflect on how the world treats them in the long scheme of things.

[Jadzia]

Seizon wrote:

Excuse my newbishness;
In my own opinion,
Open PvP encourages teamwork and evokes a sense of danger. For instance; crafters will obviously be targets because of the relationship between the two; the pvper produces nothing but requires something, and has developed a means to obtain it, while the crafter produces things but (usually) lacks the means to properly defend it. Because of this, warriors aligned to an organization will find they have an important job; protect the crafters.
Town guard KoS list (Karma system featured in the game could also help accomplish town security should a PvPer's karma drop too low, causing NPCs to attack.) and/or other mechanicisms would of course be welcome in aiding the defense against PvPers, and ways to protect items, such as locked containers and/or 'bound' important items, so to speak, which could last for one or two deaths before requiring a new 'bind'.

Restricting a sandbox game reduces player enjoyment, imo, and while dying may be frustrating, a game without death is hard to pull off, especially in such a player oriented game. (ATITD is an obvious exception.) Even restricted PK/only animal deaths could be less preferable compare to open PvP.
on another note;
Automatic game punishment of pvpers would also make the mechanic a much less enjoyable one, whereas player-imposed punishments assisted by game mechanics can be quite satisfying and add an element of danger to the pvper as well.

Hope I could at least make one point there.

I think your ideas could work well in a combat oriented game, but not in Xsyon. In this game we are after an apocalypse, the word is destroyed and we have to rebuild it...now imagine how much resource is needed for that Noone can expect players to stand beside their gathering-crafting tribemate for hours to bodyguard him, they would be bored out of their head.
So the risk of being Pked does encourage teamwork, but not in a very good way...it can be encouraged in much better way, where all of the players can take part in the current activity (like building a huge thing which requires more players).

The are no NPCs in Xsyon right now, and as far as I know there won't be any during the Prelude, so no town guards.

Binding items won't help crafters too much, when they gather-craft-build they don't use armor or weapon, and resources cannot be binded. Apart of that, binding system in a sandbox game...I'm not sure, but it doesn't sound like a sandbox type of feature

[Cochran1]

Jadzia wrote:

Seizon wrote:

Excuse my newbishness;
In my own opinion,
Open PvP encourages teamwork and evokes a sense of danger. For instance; crafters will obviously be targets because of the relationship between the two; the pvper produces nothing but requires something, and has developed a means to obtain it, while the crafter produces things but (usually) lacks the means to properly defend it. Because of this, warriors aligned to an organization will find they have an important job; protect the crafters.
Town guard KoS list (Karma system featured in the game could also help accomplish town security should a PvPer's karma drop too low, causing NPCs to attack.) and/or other mechanicisms would of course be welcome in aiding the defense against PvPers, and ways to protect items, such as locked containers and/or 'bound' important items, so to speak, which could last for one or two deaths before requiring a new 'bind'.

Restricting a sandbox game reduces player enjoyment, imo, and while dying may be frustrating, a game without death is hard to pull off, especially in such a player oriented game. (ATITD is an obvious exception.) Even restricted PK/only animal deaths could be less preferable compare to open PvP.
on another note;
Automatic game punishment of pvpers would also make the mechanic a much less enjoyable one, whereas player-imposed punishments assisted by game mechanics can be quite satisfying and add an element of danger to the pvper as well.

Hope I could at least make one point there.

I think your ideas could work well in a combat oriented game, but not in Xsyon. In this game we are after an apocalypse, the word is destroyed and we have to rebuild it...now imagine how much resource is needed for that Noone can expect players to stand beside their gathering-crafting tribemate for hours to bodyguard him, they would be bored out of their head.
So the risk of being Pked does encourage teamwork, but not in a very good way...it can be encouraged in much better way, where all of the players can take part in the current activity (like building a huge thing which requires more players).

The are no NPCs in Xsyon right now, and as far as I know there won't be any during the Prelude, so no town guards.

Binding items won't help crafters too much, when they gather-craft-build they don't use armor or weapon, and resources cannot be binded. Apart of that, binding system in a sandbox game...I'm not sure, but it doesn't sound like a sandbox type of feature

A system like group harvesting/crafting would make it a bit easier, saftey in numbers and a more profitable yield. Besides who ever heard of a mining or a deforestation project being run by a single person?

[r0ss0]

Eve is the most ruthless place to be alone , or in any security sector, Your not forced into a corp, And yes you can solo if you wish, But the game is slow, And in my eyes not nearly as fun,

What is more fun sitting on vent with around 30 of you mining an asteroid belt , With cargo runners , miners , protectors and scouts all working together,

Those that dislike pvp dont neccesarily have to ever fight , Just find the right tribe , Get involved.

And those that dont want to be forced into a tribe , Regardless of any mmo , i dont think i have ever seen many players unguilded or not with a corp etc,

This is what mmos are about

[sisler86]

r0ss0 wrote:

Eve is the most ruthless place to be alone , or in any security sector, Your not forced into a corp, And yes you can solo if you wish, But the game is slow, And in my eyes not nearly as fun,

What is more fun sitting on vent with around 30 of you mining an asteroid belt , With cargo runners , miners , protectors and scouts all working together,

Those that dislike pvp dont neccesarily have to ever fight , Just find the right tribe , Get involved.

And those that dont want to be forced into a tribe , Regardless of any mmo , i dont think i have ever seen many players unguilded or not with a corp etc,

This is what mmos are about

Very rarely in any MMO do I ever join guilds or clans. I almost always stick to myself and solo everything, but I did manage to find some friends in this community and helped start our own tribe. I'm not big on getting too involved with other players in gaming communities, but I see myself making an exception with Xsyon.